Feb. 3, 2020 - Updated r. 3.0.

Vol. III Supplement No. 3A

Name, Person, and God

This is one of the supplements to IRENT, a new translation of the New

Testament. The text of IRENT and its associated files are open to the
public and available free to all for you to challenge and be challenged.
Since 2004, the text is continually being updated, replaced, and

uploaded at http://tiny.cc/bostonreaders until time runs out.

Please make sure get latest revision and be kind to send your e-mail for
comments, critiques, corrections, or questions to ounbbx@gmail.com
as well as for a request to access to other related files of useful reference
and study material.

Alas, time and tomorrow do not wait for us!

1
 IRENT Vol. III. Supplement
No. 1 (Words, Words and Words)
No. 2 (Text, Translation and Translations)
No. 3A (Name, God, and Person)
No. 3B (Man, anthropology, and Religion)
No. 3C (Persons and People)
No. 4 (Place, Things, and Numbers)
No. 5 (Time, Calendar and Chronology)
No. 5 (Passion Week Chronology)

WALK THROUGH THE SCRIPTURE

No. 3A Name, God, and Person

See the zip files for Collections for Supplement III No. 3A

Collections #3A.1 – God, Yeshua, & Names

Collections #3A.2 – On Trinity

2
 No. 3. Names, Persons, and People

PART I. Name and Person

[Note: the arthrous ho Theos in the GNT is rendered as Elohim in IRENT; anarthrous as
'God', 'God-being', 'god', etc.]

A. Problem of Words and Problem with Words

[Words, terms, concepts, notion, idea; Meaning, definition, referencing]

Problem of 'God' we have to confront at first:

– when and why to capitalize? a
– 'God', 'god', 'the God', '(the) Elohim'
– god concept, god ideab, god notion, god reality
– 'a god' 'god' 'God' 'a God'
– 'God' as an adjectival noun? [e.g. 'God + a noun' ?]
– What God, which God, whose God.
– God for whom.
– demigod or God-man – Jesus of Christianism, not for Yeshua in the NT.

Everyone believes 'God', that is, each of us believes one's own 'God'. All believing God
in their own way. [Even atheists believe in order to convince others and themselves that
God does not exist – or the God whom people believe is the God who does not exist!]
There we have in our language space a God of the Catholics, a God of the Protestants, a
God of Muslims ('allah'), etc. Even Buddhism has a god, god of Hinduism [called
Brahman]. Even there is the God who is dead. c There are people who believe God who
is dead.

– Cf. <problem of God> - (a topic of theology, philosophy and religion)

– Cf. <God's problem> (e.g. as the book title by Bart Ehrman) – a religious,
philosophical or intellectual lingo;

The God of the Scripture – of Abraham, Isaac, and Yosef; of Moses; of David; of the
Prophets; of Yeshua; of the disciples of Yeshua, of Paul. The one same God. The God
a Ref. www.thoughtco.com/god-or-god-to-capitalize-or-not-to-capitalize-249823 <God or god – capitalization>
[a copy in <IRENT Vol. III - Supplement (Collections #1A - Words and Terms)>]
b 'what is God like?' Reading material – https://owlcation.com/humanities/The-Idea-of-God

Thomas Morris (1997), Our Idea of God - An Introduction to Philosophical Theology

c "God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him." – Friedrich Nietzsche (1882), Die fröhliche

Wissenschaft (The Joyful Wisdom; /xx: The Gay Science), Section 125 'The Parable of the Madman'. www.age-
of-the-sage.org/philosophy/friedrich_nietzsche_quotes.html www.historyguide.org/europe/madman.html
3
 whose name is YHWH; His name is not 'I AM'. No other God/god is there to be
worshipped.

They say 'Jesus is God', whatever 'God' means and whoever 'Jesus' means, armed with
proof-texting employed in juggernaut eisegesis. Thus, they de facto made him 'God' and
'Jesus' became God as the historically Apostolic Christianity died out and replaced by
Hellenic gentile and the Constantine Catholic Christianity. Along the line, Yeshua of
the New Testament is replaced by God Jesus – a great metamorphosis.

But they insist that there is only one God. This one God must be their Trinity God, a
theological construct, not a Being, nor a Person, but rather like household of God family
– 'Godhead'. It has nothing to do with the very God who is revealed with His name,
YHWH, in the Scripture.

They took from their Bible and repackaged God-head, which is composed of three
Persons, which are Father (whose father?), Son (whose son?), Holy Ghost (whose
spirit?). Each one is said to be 'God', but (mysteriously conjured) no three Gods, thank
God. They have at least four Gods. They do not define what is 'Father', what is 'Son',
what is 'Spirit' – fusion or confusion of three. [reflected in church icons of 'three headed
human' and 'three-faced head'. Cf. Bryan Graczyk, "Three-headed Trinity or Three-
faced Trinity". Cf. 'three angels' for /Trinity_(Andrei_Rublev) – interpreted as
representing one God in three persons of the Trinity.]

*person – The Trinitarians use the common word 'person' as a translation word for
Latin 'persona' (actor, mask), which itself was a translation word for Gk. /hypostasisa
and made it as their mouthful of religious-philosophical jargon, The word 'person' in
ordinary English usage is of a human being. A statement, 'God is a person', is an
example of anthropomorphic language about God-beings. The God of the Scripture is
not a person, but as a person. He is not just 'personal', but 'suprapersonal' (Hans Küng)
in relation to human beings. Various definitions of 'person' are offered in conjunction
with Trinity doctrine – 'person', 'Person', 'human person', 'divine person': but what about
'none-person' or 'non-human person'? Philosophically, a person is one who resides in
time-space dimension. A person cannot be in different places at the same time and
cannot be said to be everywhere. The adjective associated with 'God' is 'supra-natural',
not 'supernatural'.

"What we write/say does not necessarily mean to the reader/listener what we intend
them to understand," and it is easy and often "dangerous to make assumptions about
how one’s words are received.".b

In our language, the word 'God' is not something specific. As the translation word for
Hebrew 'el' or 'elohim' and for Greek 'theos', the word itself (from Gott in German
www.etymonline.com/word/god ) is hardly fit as it should be on the pages of the Bible.]
We cannot know what God is, until we decide what is meant by God.c

a
which was used in the doctrinal writings and creed in conjunction with the term ousia ('essence'
or 'substance')
b Quoting from T. Wenman, 'the God Problem – an ongoing personal search for [its] meaning', p. 5. Also
'What God is we do not know' …in Sir John Tavener’s choral work <The Veil of the Temple>.
c "… We are not there yet, and until we are, we cannot know what God is. We can only speculate." Quoting

from https://owlcation.com/humanities/The-Idea-of-God
4
 *believe: It is same with the word 'believe'. Before we say that we believe God and or
'we don't believe God', we have to make it clear: what do we mean by 'believe'? what do
we mean by 'believe God'?

Jam 2:19 "You believe that there is one God. Big deal! Even the demons believe that
much --and tremble!" ['not that 'demons believe God'] – rhetorical tone. It is not about
'faith in God'. https://faithalone.org/magazine/y1992/92nov3.html <Do Demons Really Believe?>

'believe God'; 'believe in God'; 'put trust on God' [Cf. Gk. pisteuō [+ eis/en]]

[H539 aman – Gen 15:6 etc.] 'confirm' 'support' 'established' 'stand firem' 'trust'
Isa 43:19 'believe Me (YHWH)' - KJV, NASB, HSCB, NIV; /x: believe in - NET, NLT, GW,
GNB; /xx: put faith in – NWT; /xx: trust – ISV;

*Believe God and *know God

People Group 1 – those who know 'God' – it's a gift from God.
People Group 2 – those who think they know 'God'
People Group 3 – those who not know 'God'
People Group 4 – those who do not want/bother to know God.
[Here, what does 'knowing God' mean.]

People Group A – those who believe 'God'

People Group B – those who not believe 'God'
People Group C – those who do not want/believe 'God'
[Here, what does 'believing God' mean. Cf. even demons 'believe' there is one God.

Absence of something cannot be logically proved.

As for those believing God, they don't need to prove that there is God.
As for those who say there is no God, it is logically not possible to prove it.
Actually, they have a hidden god which is themselves.

Three nefarious and nebulous common (non-technical) words: 'is', 'God', 'I', etc.
Problem with 'is' – A is 'A', but only A is 'as A', if not 'as if A'.

5
B. Person

*person; *Person Being

In English language the word *person denotes an individual human being. It is derived from Lat.
persona (actor’s mask; actor in narrative; character in a play) which became to be used to refer
to a human being. [To say ‘person’ we should be able to locate in space and place as well as
within time, a dimension to which the realm of spirit does not belong.]

However, this word also became a peculiar religious jargon, 'Person' (capitalized). A person
is said to possess attributes (of will, intellect, uniqueness of individuality) as well as actions.
However, what is a person if not a human being? Is God, any god, a person? What does
it mean by 'God is a person'? One of many or one among other persons? If we say God
is personal, it does not mean that God is actually a person. It is anthropomorphic
description of the Ultimate Being. The God-being is in reality transpersonal and what
God is, is not really 'personal', but supra-personal. That 'God is as a person' is simply
an anthromorphism.

The term 'person' is problematic when it is used in conjunction with ‘spirit, the spirit, the
Spirit’. In the doctrinal argument those important terms are employed in formulating
man-made doctrines without clear definition; definition is made out of their doctrinal
argument itself. Thus, the word one says is not same as the very word used in different
times and by different people. It gives a complicated definition of personhood. 'Person'
is not 'person'. An argument of alleged personhood the holy spirit [a.k.a. the Holy
Ghost]a is from ignorance of the literary device of 'personification'. The holy spirit is the
spirit of Elohim – it is not an independent being, an entity, or a person separate from God. [There
is no exact word in Hebrew or Greek corresponding to ‘person’.]

Jenny Teichman (1985), “The Definition of Person”,

Philosophy Vol. 60, No. 232 (Apr., 1985), pp. 175-185
www.jstor.org/stable/3750997 [A copy in Collection <IRENT Vol. III -
Supplement (Collections #3B&C - Anthropology, 'Person', Religion) >

Related words: Lat. persona; character, essence, nature; person-ness (not ‘personable-ness’);
'identity', 'reality', personification, anthropomorphism; divine person vs. divine being; human
being vs. human person. 'consciousness' 'self-awareness' 'intelligence' [cf. 'artificial intelligence']

Many in the religious articles use the term *personality in place of *personhood. The former
is a psychological term; personal style, character, bent, etc., belonging to a same level of word
category as ‘spirituality’. The latter is about identity, essence, ‘being of a person’, ‘being
person’, etc.

a
The word spirit pneuma is neutral in Greek; not masculine. In Jn 16:13-15 the pronoun 'he' is for ekeinos which
refers to 'helper' S3875 paraklētos in v. 7.
6
[See EE for a ref. 1 on ‘human being’ vs.’ human person’ – definition of the terms. Humanity vs.
humanhood vs. humanness When a human being is or becomes a human person? What does it
mean by 'humanity' vis-à-vis 'divinity' as of ‘Jesus Christ’? Also, 'divinity' vs. 'deity' of a human
being (Yeshua) or 'God Jesus'?]
[See EE for a reading material 2 on ‘non-human person’]
[Ref: http://youtu.be/ZRIddOvdH_4 (2hrs) What is a Person? Neuroscience, Human Identity
and the Christian Faith | John Wyatt]

The problem occurs this word is used as a special theological term to designate the mode of
being of God in reference to the divine Triune (the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost – Mt
28:19b KJV). Its theological use is from the Latin word, which became to be used a translation
of the Greek concepts. The effect produced by such theological tradition (in line of
‘Trinitarianism’) is an image of Godhead ('God Family'?, Divine_Council 'assembly of El'
'divine assembly' Psa 82:1 ‫ ) בעדת אל‬contrary to the Scriptural truth. Some proposes the word
capitalized ‘Person’ as a special term to use to articulate with it differentiated from a (human)
person. Such a term ‘Person’ is purely contorted artificial theological construct (as if a short-
hand) and does not help human mind comprehend and actually mislead by portraying as a single
figure with three heads or three faces (Gk. trikephalos) for a tritheistic three-person Godhead.

‘God is a person’ ‘IS GOD A PERSONa, really?’ The Being is a person just like you and mean?
What is it mean by 'person’? What does in mean by saying ‘God is a person’? What kind of
person? a divine person? a God-person? Related question is: ‘God is personal' – what does it
mean? 'God is a personal God’ (which is a circular statement). Elohim is a personal God? God
is a personal god-being? A god belongs to or is related to a 'person'? – depending on how the
word God is used and referred. The way we say ‘God is a person’ is nothing more than
anthropomorphic language to describe His relation to human beings – the acme of His creation.

The confounding problem is the meaning of the word ‘person’ in English, which has nothing to
do with the term as the Trinitarian theological construct b , which ultimately changed the
Trinitarian idea (as a reaction to the Arian heresy of ‘Christ being a creature’) to be guilty of
being de facto tritheism. The Creator YHWH Elohim cannot simply be taken as ‘a person’, just
as He cannot be ‘a God’. He is ontologically beyond what can be called as a ‘person’. "God is
trans-personal, supra-personal: the infinite itself in all that is finite, pure spirit"c, as He is supra-
natural (nothing to do with 'supernatural'). He is only as a person as human can understand Him

a
‘person’ – synonym and definition problem – Cf. homoiousios vs. homoousios vs. heterousia "similar
vs. same vs. different essence". substance, essence, attributes, being, nature (what a person is) vs.
person (who one is).
p. 135 Hick, Myth of God Incarnate.
<< Gore never believed that Jesus was a man with human hypostasis (‘person’ in a
technical sense, roughly equivalent to ‘individuating principle’ or ‘distinct logical
subject-of-predication’, and rather narrower in meaning than ‘individual spiritual
substance’). Gore believed that in Jesus there was only one person, and that the person of
the Word of God. So Jesus was not a man living a human life, but the divine Word living
a human life. Gore did not learn from Seeley that Jesus was a man after all. Seeley led him
to think that what had been lost was a full imaginative realization of what it was for the
divine Word to have actually lived a fully human life.>>
b
John J. O’Donnell, The Mystery of the Triune God (1989), Ch. VI. The Concept of Person in Trinitarian
Theology, pp. 100-111.
c
Quoting from Hans Küng (1992), Credo – The Apostles Creed Explained for Today. p.28.
7
and are graciously allowed to approach in I-Thou relation (e.g. ‘Our Father’ – Mt 6:9) because
of Yeshua as the son of Elohim. [Hence His name is a person-name for the humans can see Him
just as He has revealed to them; it is not a personal name.] On the other hand, Yeshua was a
person, human as well as divine [as He was equal to His father (Jn 5:18) and all the fullness of
Elohim dwelt in Him (Col 1:19; Eph 3:19).] [For Trinity Controversy, see a separate file in the
Collections #3 for Supplement III.]

‘Personal’ vs. ‘of person’:

The adjectival form ‘personal’ carries different nuance and sense from 'of person' -- word picture
of 'personable' 'belonging to a person'. It is the case for many adjectival words with their adjectival
counterpart. E.g. the word ‘beauty’ has an adjectival form ‘beautiful’, but the latter does not have
anything connected with the concept of ‘beauty’. In other words, English does not have a separate
form with the meaning ‘concerning with beauty’ or ‘of beauty’. Cf. ‘The natural law’ is not quite
same meaning as ‘the law of nature’.

A quite similar case is for the word ‘spirit’. There is no English word that which has meaning of
‘concerned with spirit’ or ‘of spirit’. On the other hand, the picturesque adjective word ‘spiritual’
is in a sense different from ‘of spirit’. Hence, in IRENT translation, the word ‘spirital’ (a
neologism) is used.

8
 A *human being is not yet come to be a *human person until a *name is given as to be a
functioning social being. [E.g. A baby born is not a person just yet. An unborn child is not a
person yet. In ancient times, the one in the slave class didn’t have name.] [See * human
being; * man; * person.]

“Name is not a name is not a name.” [See ‘law of contradiction’]. Each one has a *proper
name given to serve for genuine identity. It is different from a *calling name, which is
something used to ‘call’ the person. [The expression ‘one is named so-and-so’ is different
from ‘one is called by so-and-so’, as often appears in the Bible passages.] A calling name
may be a personal name (‘first name’ in Western culture), a nickname, or, often, a title. No
name in the Scripture was seen to work as a mantra, a magic word which gives special power
by saying the name with correct incantation as if a magic formula (cf. kabbalah).

Though the name is written, spelt, and pronounced the way it should be, when we say ‘name’,
we are not primarily concerned with these. The name is the person; it is what the name stands
for and of the very reality of the person (the one who carries the name). The notion of ‘name’
is the central theme in the whole Scripture. It is the most important theme of the whole
Scripture (especially pertaining to God), more than anything else, such as love, faith, etc.
since without the name, nothing has significance or relevance to the truth. In that sense, when
we refer to ‘name’, we are not talking out the name itself (as is spelt or pronounced). We are
talking about our approach to the very person. Without knowing the name, without having
the name revealed, all the truth in the Scripture is just partial and incomplete. With most of
Christian writings in which ‘God’ is mentioned a few times or in innumerable times
throughout the pages, the readers are not told who the God is and who is the reality behind
such a common title. God may be discussed in detail; however, often God as such comes as
a means or an application tool for people to reach their goals in life – which often turns out
for each one to become one’s own god for power and pleasurea. A person’s name cannot be
translated into another language, but only transcribed phonetically as close as possible to
the original pronunciation. Many of Hebrew names in the Scriptures are not properly handled
in the majority of the English bibles. [See elsewhere for the task of finding a correct
pronunciation of the divine name of Hebrew Tetragrammaton, YHWH.]

A name is there for each person – to call, to identify, and to refer with it. The expression ‘in
the name of’ does not concern how the name is precisely spelt and how it is correctly
pronounced, however these issues may be important. The word ‘name’ here is better to be
seen used metonymically. It is what the name stands for, because of who the name refers to.
Doing something in the name of someone implies that it is being done with the authority of
the person who has that name. It does not mean that something is being done by the word as
it is spelt and pronounced, as if a mantra. In some culture, people usually do not address
others by calling by their personal name, other than when there is need for identification.
The proper name is only used for the purpose to recognize and identify the person, but not
to call the person by it. [See ‘*upon the name of’.] As far as the divine name is concerned, it
goes beyond identification – who He is and what He is – to the divine Reality itself.

a
pleasure and power – on the part of humans it is pursuit of pleasure for themselves and of power to obtain
pleasure – esp. power over others. On the part of Elohim, it is power for creation and pleasure with the
creation. – 'homo hedonicus et potestas'.
9
A *title (cf. epithet, descriptor, etc.) does tell about ‘what a person is’, but it alone does not
tell ‘who the person is’. E.g. the English word ‘God’ is a countable noun of generic notion
(with the basic meaning of ‘a mighty one’ plus. sense of transcendental, having power to
control, and worship-demanding) and is used also as a title. It is a great mistake to confuse
‘titles’ with ‘names’. Many love to list “so “many names of God” and so “many names of
Jesus”, when there is only one name for God and for Yeshua!

When we say, "it's not about the name", in a way it is right. A name is not a magic
word (used as a mantra or for chanting), but it's about what the name signifies (for
reality); what it represents (identity or referent) - it's what's behind the name!

The name Yeshua was chosen to represent the works, presence, love, wisdom, grace,
mercy and salvation of YHWH Elohim! (Phi 2:5-11)

Jn 6:28-33

"For the bread of Elohim is the one who comes down from heaven, and giveth life unto the
world". Yeshua is The Work or Bread of YHWH Elohim! It Came from Heaven! It should
be enough that the work, plan, commandments and will came from YHWH ELOHIM for
anyone not to dispute it, BUT rebellion from truth runs deep in the psychic of man!

So, when YHWH Elohim GAVE THE MESSIAH A NAME it was the NAME that
represents THE WORKS OF THE FATHER! If the Father YHWH Elohim, whom the
pagans relegate to simply "god", wanted HIS WORKS to be REPRESENTED by another
name I am pretty sure he would have said so!

And when YHWH Elohim GAVE THE MESSIAH A NAME; it was the NAME that was
ABOVE (NOT EQUAL TO) EVERY name! No doubt the Father knew that man was going
to try to come up with names to represent HIS WORKS so He made it clear: those names
are counterfeit! "There is only one name of and from my will and plan", the Father says!

Mt 7:21- 23
Mt 6:9-10 - the NAME the Father chose FROM HEAVEN to REPRESENT His Works,
plan and will — is set in Heaven AND on EARTH! That’s what we pray for?

10
*Personality; *personhood

Personality

• Characteristics and qualities of a person. [used as a psychological term. In

most religious or theological writings as to related God and man the word
‘personality’ is actually ‘personhood’.] [See *self, a*selfhood, identity]

• A (well known) person

‘how a person acts and behaves’ – is always in social context. It is utmost important
for properly reading and interpreting the Scripture that the readers should see
persons and people in the Scripture as they were in their life milieu, far different
from modern westernized society and its mindset.

****
From. Malina and Rohrbaugh, Social-Science Commentary on the Synoptic Gospels
(pp. 229-231) Reading Scenarios: Mark 8:27-30

a
Ref. Rm Harré (1998), The Singular Self – An Introduction to the Psychology of Personhood. (Ch. 1 ‘On
Being a Person; Problems of Self’, pp. 1-20)]
11
Dyadic Personality

In contemporary North American culture, we consider an individual's psychological

makeup to be the key to understanding who he or she might be. We see each individual as
bounded and unique, a more or less integrated motivational and cognitive universe, a
dynamic center of awareness and judgment that is set over against other such individuals
and interacts with them. In the Mediterranean world of antiquity such a view of the
individual did not exist. There every person was embedded in others and had his or her
identity only in relation to these others who form a fundamental group. For most people this
was the family, and it meant that individuals neither acted nor thought of themselves as
persons independent of the family group. What one member of the family was, every
member of the family was, psychologically as well as in every other way. Mediterraneans
are what anthropologists call "dyadic," that is, they are "other-oriented" people who depend
on others to provide them with a sense of who they are.

DYADIC PERSONALITY INDIVIDUALIST PERSONALITY

(‘other-oriented’ - ARJ)
1. Much concern about the effect of one's decision
on others (beyond friends and nuclear family).
2. Persons are prepared to share material resources
with group members.
3. Persons are ready to share less tangible resources
with group members, e.g., giving up some
interesting activity for group ends.
4. Persons are willing to adopt the opinions of
others, especially those considered of high esteem
in the wider group.
5. Persons are constantly concerned about self-
presentation and loss of face, since these reflect
upon the group and one's position in the group.
6. Persons believe, feel, and experience an
interconnectedness with the whole group, so that
positive and negative behavior redounds to the
group.
7. Persons sense themselves to be intimately
involved in the life of other group members, to
contribute to the life of others in the group.
8. In sum, strong-group people have "concern" for
all group members. This is a sense of oneness with
other people, a perception of complex ties and
relationships and a tendency to keep other people in
mind. The root of this concern is group survival.
(‘self-oriented’ - ARJ)
1. Much concern about the effect of one's decision
on one's present standing and future chances.
2. Those who are not part of the nuclear family are
expected to provide their own material resources.
3. Generally a person is not expected to and will not
share less tangible resources with others, often not
even with nuclear family (e.g., time to watch
weekend football game).
4. Persons are expected to form their own opinion
on a range of issues, especially politics, religion,
and sex. Expert opinion accepted only in law and
health, and this only for oneself and nuclear family.
5. Unless others are involved in one's goals, there is
little concern about one's impression on others.
Embarrassment affects the individual (and at times,
the nuclear family), but not any group at large.
6. Individualists act as though insulated from
others; what they do is not perceived to affect
others, and what others do does not affect them.
7. The individualist's life is segmented. Persons feel
involved in the life of very few people, and when
they are, it is in a very specific way (e.g., the
teacher, the lawyer, etc.).
8. In sum, weak-group people have "concern"
largely for themselves (and nuclear family, at
times). They are insulated from other people, sense
themselves independent of and unconnected to
others, and tend to think of themselves alone.

12
 Table 2: Contrasting U.S. Persons with Ancient Mediterraneans
The following listing offers a summary set of contrasts between individualistic U.S. persons (not all
are such) and traditional, group-embedded, dyadic Mediterraneans. The purpose of the list is to
provide a general orientation, so that considerate readers of the New Testament might have at hand a
comparative tool for access to the contexts in which both the readers and those they read about might
be situated.

fr. Bruce Malina (2001, 3rd ed.), The New Testament World: Insights from Cultural
Anthropology. pp. 76-79.
Mediterranean Preferences U.S. Preferences
General Attitudes
- People put high value on conformity. - People put high value on independence.
- Authoritarian attitudes are the social norm. - Authoritarian attitudes are a matter of
personality.
- Superiors make decisions autocratically and - Managers (and parents) make decisions after
paternalistically. consulting with subordinates.
- Subordinates are more satisfied with superiors - Subordinates are more satisfied with superiors
who give orders and directions and maintain their who allow for participation in decision making
social distance. and play down social distance.
- Subordinates prefer superiors who make - Subordinates prefer superiors who make
decisions either autocratic-paternalistically, or in decisions in a consultative and give-and-take
majority-rule fashion. style.
- Subordinates (employees) fear to disagree with - Subordinates (employees) are less afraid to
superiors and are reluctant to trust each other. disagree with superiors and show more
cooperativeness.
Attitudes toward Status Differences
- A few should be independent, most dependent. - All should be interdependent.
- The basic fact of power precedes questions of - The use of power must be legitimated and
morality; the legitimacy of power is ascribed, subject to norms of good and evil.
like status itself. - All persons have equal rights; the powerful
- Power-wielders are entitled to privileges and should downplay their might and not look the
must look as mighty as possible. part.
- Societal upheaval is always due to some
- Societal upheaval is always due to some systemic feature. The system needs fine-tuning,
"underdog," who must be punished by force and while deviants require rehabilitation.
shame. - To change the social situation, redistribute
- To change the social situation, dethrone those in power.
power. - There is always latent harmony between t11e
- There is always latent conflict between the powerful and the powerless.
powerful and the powerless. - The powerless can unite and cooperate on the
- Since low faith in outgroup persons is the norm, basis of solidarity
the powerless will never unite and/or cooperate
Group Orientation vs. Individualism
- People born into extended families that protect - Everyone is supposed to take care of himself or
them in exchange for loyalty, commitment, in- herself and his/her immediate family.
group solidarity.
- The individual is emotionally dependent on - The individual is independent of organizations
organizations and institutions, with identity based and institutions, with identity based in the
in the social system. individual.
- Private life is invaded by in-group, kin group, - Individuals have a right to a private life and to
and organizations to which one belongs; opinions their own opinions; individual initiative and
are predetermined; individual conformity and

13
group acceptance are foremost; group achievement are foremost, with leadership as
membership is ideal. ideal.
- Social relations predetermined in terms of in-
groups, with need for prestige within the in- - People are thought about in general terms, with
groups. need to make specific friendships.
- Value standards differ greatly for in-group and
out-group members; particularism is the norm. - Value standards are to apply to all human
beings; universalism is the goal.
Ideological/Religious Outlooks
- Religion is part and parcel of the political - Religion is separate from the political system
system and the family system. and family system.
- Activist religion with emphasis on doing - Pragmatic or introvert, meditative religions.
symbolically significant things.
- Collectivist conversions. - Individual conversions.
- Worship lays stress on group identity and - Worship lays stress on the world of the
shared group history. independent actor.
- Ideological, theory-oriented thinking is popular. - Pragmatic, empirically oriented thinking is
popular.
- Activities more structured, with more explicit - Activities are less structured, with fewer
(written) rules and with a larger number of explicit (written) rules, with more generalists or
specialists involved in details, seeking amateurs. Specialists are more involved with
organizational uniformity. strategy, with pluriform organizations.
- Acquiescence in the possession of absolute - Ongoing search for relative truth.
truth.
- Belief in inequality of sexes. - Belief in equality of the sexes.
- Appeal of "tough" religious currents, - Appeal of "tender" religious currents,
philosophies, and ideologies. philosophies, and ideologies.
- Sympathy for the successful achiever, heroes - Sympathy for the unfortunate, heroes who do
who endure pain, hardship, suffering. good for the sake of other, less fortunate persons.
On the Gender Division of Labor
- Machismo (showy masculinity) is the ideal. - Gender equality of opportunity and reward is
the ideal.
- Gender roles in society are to be clearly - Gender roles in society should be fluid.
differentiated.
- Males must behave assertively, and females - Males need not be assertive but can also take
must always be caring. caring roles; females too can be assertive.
- Males should dominate in all social settings. - Differences in gender roles should not mean
differences in power.
These comparative lists have been culled from:
Hofstede, Geert. Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values. Cross-Cultural
Research and Methodology Series 5. Sage, 1984.
Malina, Bruce J. "Dealing with Biblical (Mediterranean) Characters: A Guide for U.S. Consumers." Biblical
Theology Bulletin 19 (1989):127-141.
_ _ . "Mary - Woman of the Mediterranean: Mother and Son." Biblical Theology Bulletin 20 (1990):54-64.
_ _ . "Is There a Circum-Mediterranean Person? Looking for Stereotypes." Biblical Theology Bulletin 22
(1992):66-87.

14
*Personification

Personification is a common figure-of-speech literary device to represent a thing or abstraction as a

person. In most cases, it is easy to recognize as a literary device. An example is ‘love’ in 1Co 13:4ff.
No one would mistake from such expression (e.g. ‘love endures’) that ‘love’ is meant here as a
person!

It is not in the Greek text itself but may appear in English translation – e.g. 1Jn 5:6-8 the phrase with
a verb ‘bear witness’ (‘give testimony’). When it is translated as ‘who bear witness’ instead of ‘that
bear witness’, it misleads to present ‘Spirit’, ‘water’, and ‘blood’ all as persons, compounded by the
grammatical gender incongruity. Grammatical gender masculine does not tell a word is a person, as
in the Trinitarian doctrine when ‘Spirit’ is a person, separate from other two (Father and Son). [Cf.
Unbiblical useless arguments such as ‘What is the gender of the H.S.?’, ‘Is the H.S. female?’, ‘H.S.,
he or she? – anthropomorphic ideas.]

However, the most problematic is a non-biblical personhood of the HOLY SPIRIT, which is a real
source of controversies and contentions (all unnecessary) – doctrinally and theologically speaking.
See elsewhere for further detail for ‘* holy spirit’. [Again, not to confuse the word ‘person’ with the
term ‘person’ of a Trinitarian theological construct, which happened to be translation of Latin
persona ‘mask (as of an actor)– see above.]

[Examples used by the Trinitarians to claim the Holy Person is a person, therefore, God (but not a
God!):]
www.blueletterbible.org/audio_video/popPlayer.cfm?id=11956&rel=martin_walter/Cults
Three Trinitarian 'persons' present:
• Mt 3:16-17 (at baptism)
• Mt 28:19 (in baptism formula)
• Lk 1:35 (At conception) holy spirit; Elohim's Son; power of the Most High;
• 2Co 13:14 (in benediction formula)
At resurrection:
• Act 3:26; 1Th 1:10; Act 17:31 God raises him
• Cf. Jn 2:19-21 'raise it [the Temple] up' – it does not mean 'Jesus raised himself', as if
He was God, same as 'Jehovah'.
• Cf. Rm 8:11 the spirit of the One [Elohim v. 7-9] who [x: that] raised up Yeshua out
of dead ones.
H.S. of Elohim acts as if a person: [i.e. personification, not a personhood] [the spirit of
Elohim is not impersonal force, but His power in action – Cf. 1Co 2:5 on the power of God]
• Jn 16:13; 14:15; 14:26;
• Act 5:3 [the spirit of the holiness] = 5:4 [Elohim] = 5:9 [the spirit of Adonai]; 8:29;
13:2; 16:7
• Act 1:8 when [the promised gift of] the holy spirit comes upon you
• Rm 8:26 the spirit itself pleads for us;
• Rm 8:9 a spirit of God truly dwells in you …
• Eph 4:30 grieving the spirit of the holiness of Elohim
• 1Co 2:10-13 the Spirit [of Elohim]

15
*Anthropomorphism

[Cf. The term “anthropomorphism” in its restricted sense refers to the representation of God with
the forms of humanity (such as an arm or hand). “Anthropopathism” refers to the representation of
God with the feelings of humanity. “Anthropopraxism” refers to the representation of God with
the activities of humanity. … however, the term anthropomorphism is used in a more general sense
to include all these aspects. www.equip.org/article/recognizing-and-interpreting-anthropomorphic-
language/ www.cblibrary.net/schaff_h/an/anthropomorphism.htm ]

Anthropomorphism is the representation of objects (especially of a God-being) – attributing human

characteristics, forms, attributes, faculties, or behavior to non-human entities, such as a god, animal,
object, or abstraction. The quintessential example is that ‘God has a name’. The quintessential
example is that ‘God has a name’ and ‘God does (create, say, reveal, love, etc.). Without
anthropomorphic language, we human cannot think, talk, and understand Elohim the Most-High, as
He is ‘Being’ itself – ‘Ultimate Being’, ‘Being beyond being’. Relation of God and man – the Way
to Father (to know, to hear, to approach and for Him to come to us) is what Yeshua is. (Jn 14:6).

‘God is not like a man’ (Num 23:19), but, for instruction of the many, he is like a man. –
Philo [quoted in David Clines, “Yahweh and the God of the Christian Theology”, Theology
Sep. 1980 83 (p. 325)]

Anthropomorphic languages about God is closely related to literary device of personification in

which the God, the supra-personal being, is being pictured as a personal being, similar to a human
being. In reality, everything word, expression, description or statement we make about the God-
being is with anthropomorphic languages. That He is a 'person' or He is called 'he, his, him' – it is
anthropomorphic; as the Being is neither a person (esp. as a countable noun), or masculine (in
character or 'gender').

The danger of such personifying God is that God, the Ultimate Reality of absolute otherness, is being brought
down to the level of mere mortals. Fear and awe of God is put aside and only warm-feeling of God of love is
what people try to experience and entertain. His name is brushed aside; he is turned into a God of deistic
Cosmic being (of our new age spirit) to please every sort of people and their taste. It is going with the flow –
accommodate and acquiesce to the fashion of times – a syncretism sweetened with prosperity gospels and
psychologic manipulation, a God created in the image of human minds and spirits. [A hint: yes, there is ‘Jesus’,
but there is no ‘Yeshua’ nor ‘YHWH’ in their language and mind.]

[Cf. ‘eisegesis’ ‘proof texts’ ‘anachronism’]

*grammatical gender vs. third person singular pronoun

[See WB # 1 for <Grammatical problem with English and Greek articles> - related to
'God' and 'a god' of Jn 1:1c translation issue.]

[See in the Appendix below for On the English word ‘God’.]

[Note: ‘Ref.’ means some reading material I have found useful, not only to offer
plausible solutions to problems but also to bring up unanswered questions and to
present challenges. Not all written in there are relevant to the topics under the
16
discussion here. Not all written can be correct, right or accurate. The readers should
exercise their own judgment to make use of them. Be diligent to study and compare!

To have terms and words clearly define is one of most important preliminary steps
for reading/understanding/interpreting, esp. when dealing with theology and
doctrines. It should not be jargon – religious, theological, or church.

Those to be at the top of the list of the words and terms are:
(1) ‘person’
‘What makes a person a person?’ [Can God be 'a person']

An entity which can be logically and linguistically perceived in human

mind as a person should prove to be self-conscious. It has to have a proper
name; it should be able to say explicitly ‘I am who I am’.

Confusingly and misleadingly it is used as a theological jargon ‘person’

(often capitalized as ‘Person’), which is a Latin translate of a theological
Greek term, in the Trinitarian doctrine, which is actually binitarian (as is
for the Jehovah’s Witnesses), as the holy spirit, which is simply the Spirit
of Elohim, cannot be equated as a person. Cf. a literary device of
personification should not be read literally for being of a person.

Note: almost in all occasions of theological and doctrinal argument the

word ‘personality’ (which is a term of psychology, a set of
characteristics/qualities of a person) is incorrectly used (e.g. as in
‘personality of the Holy Ghost’) in places of the term ‘personhood’.
[Ref.
www.mind.ilstu.edu/curriculum/what_is_a_person/what_is_a_person.php
See a copy in IRENT Supplement III (Collections #3)]

(2) ‘name’ – here we are dealing with the name(s) of a person; should not be
confused with epithets or titles.
(3) ‘god’- see ‘* God problem’ ‘God confusion’ in this article.

Examples of proper names and titles

– see under ‘* Jesus’ ‘* Christ’ for detail.
• ‘Jesus’ for ‘Yeshua’ (← ‘deliverance’ ‘salvation’)
• ‘Christ’ for ‘Mashiah (> Messiah)’;
• ‘Jesus Christ’ < Yeshua as Mashiah (in the Gospels) or 'Yeshua Mashiah' (in the Acts
to Revelation); (Cf. ‘Lord Yeshua Mashiah’)
• ‘James’ for Yaakob, etc.

17
Examples of words translated in IRENT differently from other translations:
• Transliteration of Hebrew is adopted as much as possible for Hebrew/Aramaic
person name – Mattithyahu (> Matthew), Shimon (> Simon), Kefa (> Cephas),
etc. A notable example is ‘Yaakob’ > ‘Jacob’ >> ‘James’]
• Torah-sage > ‘law-expert’; /x: ‘lawyer’; (Gk. nomikos - Lk 7:30 etc.)
Torah-teacher (Gk. nomodidaskaloi - Lk 5:17); /x: doctor of the law; /x: teacher
of the law; /x: expert in the law;
• Yehudim (pl.) > Jews; Yehudi (sing.); > Jew [With Hebrew loanword IRENT
effectively bypasses the problem word ‘Jews’ which is too complicated to solve and
suffers anachronism with wrong word association, contrary to the real sense in the text
in that period of time and history]; [people of the Tribe of Yehudah (/Yudah; /Judah).]
[cf. a Judaic (cf. a Jew); a Jewish; an Israelite; a Hebrew; a Judean (native of Judea);
‘/x: Judean authorities’; Cf. a (modern) Israeli] [Cf. anti-Semitic ethnic slur
(ethnophaulism).] [The words ‘Jew’ ‘Jews’ ‘Jewish’ do not belong to the translated text
of the English Bibles.]

• Yehudism > Judaism; /x: Yahudism; [Gal 1:13, 14; /xxx: Judeanism – Danker’s,
(p. 177) – ' Judean religion'?]

18
A short list of words with details discussed elsewhere:

• *priest a – The word ‘priest’ is retained in IRENT, though it is now associated with
Catholic and other churches with quite different meaning, usage, and significance, and word
association than those in the Biblical times.

• fellow brother; fellow brethren – The word ‘brother’ when it occurs outside the
Gospels, it refers to a follower of Yeshua the Mashiah (> Messiah) in common
fellowship. Traditionally it is simply translated as ‘brother’. In plural form, brethren
(as in KJV) is kept instead of brothers. [To have its plural word translated as ‘brothers
and sisters’ is a result of gender confusion in the Western society. It is totally
inappropriate for the Bible and frivolous to the confusion of the readers, bringing a
wrong sense into the text.]

• the Spirt; the spirit of the holiness; the holy spirit; holy spirit: Different
capitalization in IRENT. Not capitalized as ‘the holy Spirit’ in IRENT. The word
‘Spirit’ is capitalized only when it stands alone in the sense of ‘Spirit of Elohim’. The
word 'holy' is uncapitalized throughout except for the fixed Greek arthrous phrase eis
ta hagio (Heb 9:12 'into the Holy place') [cf. en topō hagiō (Mt 24:25 'in a holy
place')]. It is simply as a typographical device to tell the Gk. word for 'holy' is arthrous
and has nothing to do with the issue of 'personhood' or 'personality' 'deity' of the Holy
Ghost (as rendered in KJV).

a
E.g. kohen (pl. kohanim) = priest (priests); head-Kohanim = chief priests [‘chief’ with a sense
of only one chief]; high priests; leading priests. The High Kohen (Kohen haGadol = the High Priest;
the Chief Priest. kehunnah - priesthood, priestly office/service; 7x (Lk 1:9; 3:2; Heb 7:11, 12, 24;
1Pe 2:5, 9); [Note: some Bible translations use both phrases ‘chief priest(s)’ and ‘high priest(s)’ –
cf. in Gospels and Hebrews]
19
C. Name; Title

Name: a word or phrase by which a person, place, or thing, a body or class, or any object
of thought is designated, called, or known. Distinct from 'nickname', 'label', 'title', or
'epithet'

Cf. 'first name' 'given name'

Cf. 'last name' (surname) 'family name'

In GNT, unless it is in vocative or modified by a label or a descriptive phrase, it is with

the name anarthrous (e.g. 'Yeshua') that a person is introduced first in the narrative.
Subsequently it is arthrous (e.g. 'the Yeshua'). IRENT follows the English convention
which does not use the definite article for a person's name, unless it is in the sense of
'the particular' or 'the aforementioned' person.

E.g. 'Yosef' (Mt 1:16) → 'the Yosef' (v. 18, 24 to Ioseph) cf. 'Yosef her husband' (v.
18); cf. 'O Yosef, son of David' (v. 20).
E.g, 'Yeshua' (Mt 1:16) 'his name Yeshua' (v. 25) → 'the Yeshua' (2:1; 3:13, etc.)

'What's in a name?'a

A person is the being who has a name. The name is that which represents and identifies
the person. Often the word 'name' is used as a synecdoche for 'authority' of the person.b

They may be addressed to or called by the name when the person's identity is to be in
focus. However, they are usually called not by the name but an epithet – often a title or a
descriptor (of offices e.g.). [Cf. "onomastics"]. It is not to be confused with the word
'name' which is applied to a non-person (e.g. things, concepts, ideas).

Only ‘person’ has name – ‘person name’ (rather than ‘personal name’ – personable, etc.).
A person has one name – the proper name; anything else is like a nickname or an epithet.
Person name should not be confused with 'title'. A title is not a name. A title does not
identify a person, but describes. A same title can be shared by other persons. A title does

a
Cf. a phrase from Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet:
"What's in a name?
That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet".
Cf. a line is from Gertrude Stein's poem titled <Sacred Emily> (1913) – published in Geography and
Plays (1922). www.gutenberg.org/files/33403/33403-h/33403-h.htm
'Rose is a rose is a rose is a rose …'.
b
E.g. such as in the phrase 'in the name of'. Cf. Phi 2:9 'name' is as a synecdoche.
20
not offer identification. Often a title of someone is treated as a name.a The word 'God' is
not a name; it is a descriptive title which may be used even for human or nonhuman. [See
* Shared Titles of Yeshua with Elohim the Father.]

The very name of a person is for identity and for the authority of the person. The name
cannot be translated but should only be transliterated into different language as
phonetically close as possible to the original. E.g. There is no 'j' sound in the Hebrew or
the Greek.b Any name with the letter 'j' in the Bile should be replaced by 'y'.

Note: the holy spirit, which is the spirit of Elohim, does not have a name and it is a
descriptor. 'Worship' is only to a person who has the person name (not 'title'). That
'worship God' is a misleading expression which comes out of mouth of people who does
not regard the name of their God.

Gk. expression 'call the name'. Who gives the name when a child is born?

Does any of the texts suggest to justify to translate that she is the one to give the
name – grammatically with the word 'to call (the name)'? It is not consistent in how
it is translated -- even in a given bible translation.

(H7121 qara. + H8034 shem)

Gen 19:37, 29:32, 30:8, 11, 18:20, 21, 34; 35:18; 38:4, 5; Jdg 13:24; 1Sam 4:12;
2Sam 12:24; 1Ch 7:16;

(S2564 kaleo + S3686 onoma)

• 'call the * name of him Immanuel' [Mt 1:23] < 'call him Immanuel'
(IRENT).
• 'call his name Yeshua' [Mt 1:25]
• 'call him Yeshua' [Lk 1:31]
* Here 'name' is in the sense of a title. 'him' refers to the one born of the maiden in
Isaiah, not Yeshua.
EE Mt 1:21 you’re to call (his name) ░░ \kaleseis (2S) (= Lk 1:31 you – Mariam – shall have him
called > shall call); [Cf. Aramaic (masc. 2nd = fem. 3rd)]; /x: his name shall be called – ARJ; /x: he shall be
called – ARJ; /you will call him - most; /> you shall call – ARJ; /you are to call – JNT; /x: you must call – NWT;

a
E.g. as in the phrase 'many names of God'. Here even the word 'God' is mistaken as a name.
b
Cf. 'Hallelujah' as spelt in English is pronounced as <ha-lə-ˈlü-yə> and there is no 'j' sound.
21
Name or Title

word or term.

Cf. ‘notion’, ‘concept’

Cf. words, vocabulary, ‘jargon’, specialty words; technical words, lingo

‘meaning’, ‘sense’, ‘definition’.

Cf. ‘usage’, ‘referencing’, metonym

Cf. connotation vs. denotation
Cf. semantic field

name vs. title:

Cf. ‘epithets’a, ‘labels’ and ‘descriptives’ (as for one's officesb).
The person name is for identity. The title is not another name (as in 'Jesus = Christ'), but a descriptor.
E.g. YHWH Elohim means not 'YHWH = Elohim', but 'YHWH as Elohim' – Elohim we worship.
Not that God is named YHWH, but YHWH is as God (Elohim) we believe. A title is not for
identity. Same titles may be shared by different person. Someone has titles same as God's does not
make him to be God!

In the Old Testament times, a name was not only identification, but an identity as well. Many times, a special
meaning was attached to the name. Names had, among other purposes, an explanatory purpose (e.g., Nabal,
meaning "fool" … and folly is with him:" - 1Sa 25:25). Throughout Scripture God reveals Himself to us
through His names. When we study these names that He reveals to us in the Bible, we will better understand
who God really is. The meanings behind God's names reveal the central personality and nature of the One who
bears them.

We cannot simply or casually say 'we believe God' and be done with. because it requires
to answer which God and what God and whose God. We believe the God (Elohim). We
believe YHWH whom we worship as our Elohim, the one true Elohim revealed through
the Scripture and in human history. Here, we have Shema Yisrael Mk 12:29 " … YHWH
is our Elohim; YHWH is one – [one true Elohim we worship]" before anything can be said
with the very first 'commandment', the very word, the guide and instruction for our life.
See elsewhere on 'God problem' 'God is not God'. ' … You believe there is one God! Big
deal. Even demons believe that. …' (Jam 2:19).

Same is true with 'Yeshua Mashiah' (>> 'Jesus Christ') Iēsous Christos (5x in the Gospels
Mt 1:1, 18 v.l.; Mk 1:1; Jn 1:17; 17:3. Not in G-Lk)]: It is 'Yeshua as Mashiah' in the
Gospel setting -- Yeshua came as a Mashiah, and as a Davidic Mashiah king (Mt 27:11, 22)
He was to be put to death. In the setting of Acts to Revelation Yeshua is the risen and
exalted Lord, who is beyond the figure of a Davidic Mashiah, it is 'Yeshua the Mashiah'.

In the same way we may say 'we worship Jesus as God'; but we cannot see 'Jesus is God'
in the Bible.

'God the Son', a non-biblical jargon by the Trinitarians referring to their 'God Jesus', cannot
be the son of Elohim. To be the son of Elohim does not require the son of Elohim to be

a
‘epithet’ = a word or phrase characterizing a person or thing
b
‘office’ = a person’s position of authority and responsibility in an organization:
22
 God the Son. Adam is called a son of God (Lk 3:3); those led by the Spirit are sons of God
(Rm 8:14). To be a son of God does not require to be 'God'.

Evolution of the Trinitarian thinking on 'Jesus': Yeshua, the man → Yeshua, human &
divine (exalted) = the son of Elohim, son of Yosef from the line of David → Jesus, God
the Son, born of a virgin, adopted as son of Joseph → Jesus worshiped as God → Jesus
became 'God' → Jesus-God → practically displacing YHWH Elohim in devotion,
'worship', and prayer with the divine name itself covered up in the church language, thanks
to Jewish practice of prohibiting to pronounce the name.

Isa 12:4 call [H7121 qara] + upon the name bismow [H8034 shem] = S1941 epikeleō - Act 15:17
(← Amo 9:12); Jam 2:7; [Gen. 4: 26, Exo 3: 15, Joel 2:32, Acts 4:12, Rm 10:13, etc.]

Words and synonyms related with ‘name’

[Related terms: label, epithet; title, calling name; appellation; symbol, designator, identifier; pointer.
Many synonyms and related words for ‘name’:
nomen, moniker, appellation, epithet, personal name, cognomen, nickname, byname, sobriquet,
agnomen; last name, surname, family name’ birth name, first name, forename, Christian name,
given name, maiden name (cf. Lucy Stone League), married name; anthroponym, autonym,
patronym, matronym, hypocorism, pet name, pseudonym, nom de guerre , alias, tria nomina,
praenomen, nomen, and cognomen; code name, cover, pen name, stage name, nom de
plume, brand, trade name; signature, , handle, sign, mark, icon, symbol, badge, tag, label,
title, classification, designation, rubric, eponym, common name; genus, denomination,
class, species, type; anonym; endonym, exonym; onomastics [study of proper names –
anthroponyms (person) and toponyms (place name)], demonym (a term for the residents
of a locality), agronym (of a field or pasture), dromonym (a transportation route),
drymonym (of a forest or grove), econym (of a village or town), limnonym (of a lake or
pond), and necronym (of a cemetery or burial ground).

23
Name or Title: The terms ‘name’ and ‘titles’ of one example of how we often indiscriminately
use them. E.g. ‘many names of God’ is either (1) names of different religions or languages; (2)
or many ‘titles’ for it. A name may appear in a title, such as of a book. A subtle consequence is
to dilute out and miss the significance of the name itself which bears on our faith. Name is for
‘who the person is’; not to be confused with ‘title’ for ‘what the person is’.

"… In these ancient and modern precautions and prostrations must be seen a genuine fear of the inherent
power of divine names. The name is a reality, an aspect of the deity, not an epitaph. …" [after Galen
Goldsmith]

Name of a person in the Bible serves four purposes: (edited on the entry 'Name' p. 84 –
edited; John Eddison (1978), Key Words to Bible Truth.

1. To identify. This was their simplest and most obvious use, and perhaps their only one
in English today; for a name is a personal label used to identify and refer to someone as
is to something.

2. To signify. Much more importantly, when a name was given to someone in the Bible,
it was nearly always associated with some experience or even of great significance.
Abraham's new name indicated the part he was to play as the father of a nation (Gen l7:5,
6); Yaakob's marked a turning point in his life (Gen 32:28), and so did Simon's (Jn 1:42);
while the name 'Yeshua' ['Yah is salvation'; not 'Jesus'] signified the work which he had
come to do (Mt 1:21).

3. To typify. In a metaphorical sense the 'name' of someone often represents or stands for
his person or character. It could imply dignity (Phi 2:9, 10), as when we say, 'He has
made a great name for himself, authority (Jn 14:14), as when we say, 'Please use my
name', and integrity (Psa 8:9 AV), as, for example, when we say 'This firm has an
excellent name'. It was because of all that it stood for. that the Third Commandment
forbids us to take the name of God in vain (Ex 20:7); for to use it in a cheap or empty
way is to denigrate what it represents, namely his perfect character of holiness, love and
power.

4. To unify. When a woman marries, she loses her own surname and takes that of her
husband, and this is a sign of a new relationship between them (Isa 4:1); and it is
interesting to notice that God's people are 'called by the name of the Lord' (Deu 28:9,10;
Num 6:27; Isa 43:7). The followers of Christ bear the name of him, an honor of which
they must be worthy (2Tm 2:19) and for which they must be prepared to suffer (1Pe
4:14).

'Name' – to be honored, sanctified, not to be shamed or blasphemed. Not a title to be

called out – ARJ;

There is only one name for Elohim, the true God of the Scripture; there is only one name for
Mashiah. All others are titles or descriptors, not names. The name of Him is not for a compound
unity. A human name points to one’s identity for function of identification and recognizing and
used also for calling/addressing. However, the divine name points to the reality behind the name
and revealing who He is; not for identification and nor for calling/addressing. The name has to
be revealed, remembered and revered. In our words, spoken and written, we are to guard the
sanctity of the divine sacred name. His name cannot be swept under the rug and replaced with
24
any other name, including the name of Yeshua Mashiah, the very name which Elohim the Father
halted (Phi 2:9).

A title is not for identity. The same title can be shared by others.

E.g. if we take the word 'God' in English as a title, actually we are saying of the person 'is as God',
not the person 'is God' (identical with 'God'), whatever the word God means. It is same for
'Mashiah' (or Messiah), which is not same as 'Christ' as translated into Greek and then into English.
The person who is called 'Mashiah' in the New Testament never called himself so, and nor claimed
outright to be Mashiah, nor to be 'Christ'a. He was believed as the very Mashiah by his followers
— as the Anointed by Elohim, who was promised to come.
Cf. 'Reverend' – rather an irreverent title used by religious people – to be revered/worshiped?

What’s in the name?

Name – a word to designate a person, place, or tangible or intangible object. In the Scripture
it is person’s name that concerns us. Heb. sem; Gk. onoma b.

The name of a person stands for the reality and the character of the one who carries the
name, hence his power and authority. See below ‘what’s in a name’.] [The Name and the
Title are not mantras, something to conjure someone up with.]

Q: What is name? (rather than ‘what is a name?’c)

Q: What does it mean by ‘name’ – (should not be confused with titles or calling
names).
Q: What is in a name?
Q: Does a name tell something about the person carrying it?
Q: Does or how does a name influence a person's character? d.

There is only one name for Elohim; one name Yeshua. Often titles, epithets, appellations,
appellatives, and descriptors are confused as the word ‘name’: E.g. ‘Many names of Jesus’,
‘Many names of God’.

a
In Christian lingo, the word 'Christ' is not use in the original sense, but it is used as the substitute for
His name ('Jesus'), hence, Jesus (the one they claim have been born of a virgin asexually, i.e. he was a
demi-god or god-man) = Jesus Christ = Christ, along with the notion of 'God' to fit in this line of eisegesis
of the Bible which again is translated from the Scripture, based on the same doctrinal position. 'Jesus
Christ' of the Christian religion is not same as 'Yeshua Mashiah' in the New Testament. See how the
Jewish people have rejected the Christian idea of 'Jesus' (of Christian religion and churches) as messiah
in www.aish.com/jw/s/48892792.html .
b
NAME (Heb. sem; Gk. onoma) - The designation of a person or place. Names carry more value and
importance in biblical than in modern usage. Not only may a name identify, but it frequently expresses
the essential nature of its bearer; to know the name is to know the person (cf. Psa 9: 10 [MT 11]). –
Eerdmans Bible Dictionary (1987)
c
what is a name - www.jimwegryn.com/Names/What%20is%20a%20name.htm
d
person’s name analysis (as in kabalarian style – a common practice in the oriental society.
25
The titlea signifies what the person is (as a term to denote person’s role, ‘mask’, or function with which
to relate with others). With descriptive expressive content, it is of referent function only. Not to
say the named person being identical to the title. Often used as a ‘calling name’, a term used in
anthropology and linguistics as the name by which a person is normally identified in addressing
or conversation. Some titles are divine titles (e.g. the Savior). That a person is given divine b
titles does not mean that he is a God. [E.g. 'our Savior' as to Elohim as well as Yeshua - Cf.
examples of crux interpretum – Tit 2:13; 2Pe 1:1]

The person name (naming belonging to a person), on the other hand, is not same as title, but it
is who the person is – the identity. Thus, the name is not simply a word, but IS the very person.
It is of identity and essential reality. It is by way of the name as well as the face that a person
presents one’s soul in its existence (the whole being of self) to others. Names are essential and
called upon for identification (to tell who one is). However, most commonly, the word ‘name’
is used not substitute of the name spelt, written and inscribed, but as what it stands for and what
it carries with (as to authority and reality of the person). The central role that names play in
biblical narratives and histories (as often in literature) cannot be overemphasized. The meaning
of a person has its own significance (especially in Hebrew names). English word ‘name’ has a
very broad usage and extended meanings Hebrew word ‘shem’ may carry various senses – a
person’s character, fame/refutation, glory, and memorial. The name for a person is a totally
different concept from names used to designate things or ideas. The name of a person is not
confused with titles, a number of which can be attached to a person. All the names of human
persons are given by someone else. Many names of God (or rather ‘God-being’) are given by
men and are not personal proper names but labels, descriptors, or epithets, and sometimes titles
(calling-names).c

In Judaic practice, the expression ‘the Name’ (HaShem) is for designation of God and used in
place of His personal name. In the Scripture, as throughout the Semitic world, a name carries
significance beyond that of its meaning or its use as a title.3

What could be the most important word or words in the Scripture (aside from ‘proper names’)?
Would it be ‘love’, ‘life’, ‘light’, ‘spirit’, ‘faith’, ‘grace’, ‘law’, ‘justice’, ‘judgment’, ‘salvation’,
‘creation’? All of these are essential. However, the most fundamental word on which all these
are woven together is ‘name’. This is the single most important thematic word in the whole
Scripture. Without the name nothing can come out of the Scripture. The divine person-name (>
‘personal name’) is not only for referencing, representation and identification but more
importantly for revelation of who He is. Without God’s name revealed no truth can be true.

a
‘title’ – One may carry several titles. E.g. the titles which are carried by Yeshua are many and some of
them are same as the titles for Elohim Himself. Here these titles should not be confused as ‘name’, thus
erroneous conclusion that the two (YHWH and Yeshua) are the same and identical person, a linguistic
absurdity and sophistry, throwing the title ‘Son of God’ completely out of their mind. Pastors are
shepherds, Same take on a title of 'Reverend', which properly belongs to the God Himself. Does such a
divine title make them a God?
b
The word *divine – 'of God, from God' – as such does not apply to God Himself. 'Divine God' is an
oxymoron. It can be applied to anyone and anything other than God the Almighty. E.g. the name of God;
the throne of God, the power, etc. God cannot be ascribed as 'a divine person'. Only a human person can
be divine person – Divine Man, as Yeshua was. [See in WB #1 Words, Words and Words.]
c
E.g. God, Gott (German), theos (Greek), 천주 (Ko. Catholic) = 天主 (Tīanzhǔ - Chinese; ‘Lord
of Heaven’; cf. 上帝 상제); かみ (kami, 神- Japanese), Allah (Islam), Brahman (Hinduism) –
all are titles. In English usage, 'God' does not tell what God or which God – it needs the context
of whose God.
26
[Such name itself cannot be something to be worshiped.]a So prevalent and fervent among the
People of the Book, all the dissensions and divisions, dogmatism, doctrinarism, as well as
sectarianism, heresies, and political contentions can in fact be traced from their ignorance on the
revealed name and from their sheer ignoring the significance of the name with only lip service
on the name as shown in their religious tradition. It is not difficult to see that ultimately, they
find themselves disconnected from the very root of all – Hebraic root of their Bible and their
faith.b

Nothing is important for a person other than the name belongs to him. To honor someone is to
keep the name honored. Honoring God’s namec is the single guideline we have for the life of
every soul as made in the image of Elohim. The first stone-tablet of the Ten Commandments
(Exo 20:1-11; //Deu 5:4-15) is the beginning of all the teaching, instruction, and guidance (=
‘Torah’ in its basic sense) and lies in one theme – ‘Honor His name as He himself has revealed’.
This exactly corresponds to the first in the Lord’s Prayer (Mt 6:9 //Lk 11:2 in the sense of ‘Our
Father! [who are in the heavens] Your name shall be honored or 'hallowed'. When martyrs die
it is to keep God’s name honored, not so much to keep his ‘faith’, as if ‘faith’ is something
precious and valuable. When one follows the commands, it is done in the very name – to keep
the name honored and with the authority granted from Him. God’s name is not what we pray.d

To honor the name is far beyond having concern of how it should be spelt and of how it should
be properly pronounced. It is not about how to keep it ‘safely’ from uttering it in to 'make the
name useless' Exo 20:7). Not to keep the name honored means to be meticulous in keep uttering
and putting down on the writing on every occasion, everywhere and on every place. Both cannot
escape to be seen as affront to His name.

The name is a pointer to what the name stands for, that is, the identity and reality signified by
the name. To ‘know’ experientially the revealed Name is the beginning of faith in the One whom
the revealed name points to.e

If we take a common example of father-son relation, ‘father’ (to his son) is not a name, but a
title. His name = the person Father. That he is the father is far more than that he has a name to
be identified with, but he comes as father in such special relation. Would anyone call one’s own
father by his name – as he thinks to honor him by doing that whenever, everywhere, to everyone?
a
or used as a mantra to invoke to tap power from.
b
We all are in urgent need to get back and keep coming back, not just ‘back to the Bible’, but,
through the Bibles, back to the Scripture itself. It should not be read as something written in
Church language, but in the original language to the original audience. A danger still lurks for
us to be carried away and read it the way we want, not to hear what the Scripture says. [Tony
Evans, http://youtu.be/HmfFW0gPuyE (Jesus Through the Bible)]
c
On honoring God’s name: In the Scripture things are good or not (i.e. worthy or not) only so
simply by whether God’s name is honored or dishonored. (Cf. Mt 6:9 //Lk 11:2 – have the name
sanctified and honored. Cf. Exo 20:7 'shall not make the name of YHWH your Elohim useless')
See elsewhere here for ‘good things vs. '*unworthy things’.
d
‘Praying the names of God’ is a title of a book. Probably misnamed (or rather title) – conjure up with
the names? We do not pray God’s name; we pray to Elohim whose name is YHWH.
e
‘to know the name’ is frighteningly important in our life where one can only exist to other – engaging
in dynamic interaction. In any human society it is the beginning of a relationship in which even ‘love’
shows its existence. [E.g. to go by “on a first name basis” in the Western culture is sourly missing in the
oriental culture.]
27
The name when put on one’s lips or in letter is to refer to the reality behind, but not to call out
or apply to whatever one can think of. The same position holds as well for attempt to use God’s
personal name as a translation word in the Bible vis-à-vis His titles, Lord or God.

A common expression in the writings by biblical scholars and writers, ‘God has many names’ a
the word ‘name’ does not mean ‘name’ but epithets or titles. The God of the Scripture (Elohim)
has only one name, the name which He himself revealed, that is, YHWH.

What's in a Name? https://jewsforjesus.org/answers/jesus/an-introduction-to-the-names-

yehoshuajoshua-yeshua-jesus-and-yeshu

Modern onomastics warns against a dilettantish approach to the subject that is only interested
in the meaning of a name and its etymology. The meaning of a name is conditioned by a
number of factors, historical, religious, cultural, sociological, political and social, and the
naming custom of the milieu in question. This applies to the name-giver's motive as well as
to the surrounding community's response to the name. Add to this a number of collective and
individual emotional, psychological, aesthetic factors, and local naming traditions.

We must assume that roughly the same factors were in force in a Jewish milieu in the
centuries about the beginning of our era. While etymology, in a modern context, often plays
a very secondary part, there can be no doubt that it is much more important in a Jewish
context about the beginning of our era. The rabbis have much to say about this. And yet the
etymological and lexical approaches must be supplemented by other approaches.

The name-bearer's history is one of these. The response to a given name is definitely
determined by the history of the name-bearer. In May 1945 no child was given the name of
Adolf! In the case of Jesus, we may assume that his disciples' relationship to him influenced
their relationship to his name. I know it is difficult to argue when we are talking about
emotions, but there is no reason to consider the people of the first Church to be more blunted
than others. It is difficult to imagine that the name of Jesus should have been a neutral name
to those who came to faith in him as the resurrected Lord.

Also, the context plays an important part. For example, if it is possible, in the New Testament,
to find semantic fields and compounds where the name Jesus appears in a position which,
according to the Old Testament's linguistic pattern, is reserved for JHWH, it becomes
possible to understand the theological value of the name of Jesus, the Christological
overtones which are associated with it in the New Testament, and the connotations in the
minds of the Christians of the first century.

a
‘God has many names’ – Google search shows almost a half million hits. There are quite a number of
books written on the theme. What is seen in a book by John Hick (1982), God has many names, is the
God (=Elohim), mistaken having many names, is to be replaced by a nameless God [s.v.] of religious
pluralism. Note the term ‘name’ [of a person] is often not discriminated from ‘titles’ or ‘descriptors’ of
that person, including of ‘God’.
28
 Yeshua, Yeshuah vs. Yeshu, Yesh in Ivrit (Hebrew)

Yehoshua is formally a theophoric name with the tetragrammaton YHWH as its first element.
The first man to bear the name is bin Nun, who was first called Hoshea. The change from
Hoshea to Yehoshua (Num 13:16) was easily effected: it only took the prefixing of the little
Yod. With a stroke, the letter Yod was given satisfaction. When the name Abram became
Abraham (Gen 17:5) and Sarai became Sarah (Gen 17:15), the letter Yod was split up into
two He's (2 x 5 = 10), which the letter Yod complains of to God (according to Midr Gen R
XLVII,1). But with the name Yehoshua Yod gets satisfaction: …

Apart from bin Nun a few others in the biblical tradition bear the name of Yehoshua, among
them Jozadak's son who, together with Zerubbabel, returned to Palestine from Babylon. Both
are positive figures in the biblical tradition -- and therefore their names are also "good". Both
these Yehoshuas are mentioned by the long forms of the name, Yehoshua, in the prophets
Haggai and Zechariah while Ezra and Nehemiah use a short form, namely Yeshua, and what
is most remarkable is that in Neh 8:17 the short form Yeshua is used about bin Nun, which is
clear evidence that the long form Yehoshua is being replaced by the short form Yeshua. In
times to come this short form was to become the dominant one.

…What is safe to say is that inscriptions and discoveries of ossuaries from Palestine show
that the form Yeshua was a quite common personal name, and that this Yeshua corresponds
to the Greek "Iesous". Philo is familiar with the factual meaning of the Greek form, which
he renders "soteria kuriou" (the Lord's salvation).

… I have not been able to trace an inscription from New Testament times which has the long
form Yehoshua.

Of course, the literary name Yehoshua was not forgotten by those who were familiar with the
biblical scriptures. But in this connection, it may also be mentioned that the Qumran scrolls
have examples of bin Nun's name being rendered Yeshua (e.g. Testimonium 4QT 21). If we
move on to the time of Bar Kokhba, the rediscovered correspondence material shows that
several of the leading people among Bar Kokhba's followers bore the name of Yeshua. One of
the less known is Yeshua ben Yeshua (Y. Yadin, Bar Kokhba. The rediscovery of the
legendary hero ..., Jerusalem, 1971, pp. 270-271; 222-253).

Taken together, our evidence clearly indicates that the name of Jesus of Nazareth was Yeshua
and not Yehoshua. The name had an Ayin at the end. Further, it is worthy of note that over the
first 100 years after Yeshua of Nazareth it is not possible to demonstrate any significant
change of the Jewish nomenclature as to the use of Yeshua and the corresponding Greek
Iesous.

29
*in the name of ~ --.

[One's name as metonym for ones' authority]

eis to onoma into the name of (Mt 28:19; 1Jn 5:13)

en tō onomati in the name of (Jn 5:54)
tō onomati in the name of (Mt 7:22; Act 3:16)
cf. onomazótō (S3687) onomati to name (> invoke; > use) the name of (Act 19:13)

*call on the name; call upon the name

The expression ‘call upon the name’ does not mean ‘calling Him by name’. No one calls one’s
own father by the name! The father is referred to but not addressed to by his name. We do not
worship nor believe in ‘the name’ as such; but the divine reality. Nor do we believe in ‘God’
and worship ‘God’ as such, as the word is simply a title with generic notion. As an inside
language it may be acceptable, but by itself it does not make clear about which God, what God,
etc. The common English word ‘God’ fails to point to the Creator in the Scripture and is not
adequate to render Gk. ho theos ['the God' – IRENT renders it as 'Elohim'; anarthrous noun as
'God' 'God-being' 'god', etc.]; here English convention does not use the definite article for God,
except infrequently when the article seems to particularize it (e.g. Mk 12:26; 2Co 1:3; etc.)
• "call upon the name of YHWH" (Gen 4:26)
• "call upon the name of Adonai" (Rm 10:13 ← Joel 2:32)
• "call upon the name of our Lord Yeshua" (1Co 1:2)

Zep 3:9
"Then I will restore the language of the peoples,
that they all may call on the name of YHWH
and serve Him with one accord
restore [H2015 haphak 'turn (back)' 'overthrow']; language [H8193 saphah 'lip' 'speech']
Isaiah 64:7
7. No one calls on Your name
or strives to lay hold of you;
for you have hidden your face from us
and made us waste away because of our iniquities.
8. But now, O YHWH, You are our Father;
we are the clay, and You our potter;
and we all are the work of Your hand.
9. Do not be angry beyond measure, O YHWH;
do not remember our iniquities forever.
Oh, look upon us, please,
for we are all your people.
iniquity. [H5771 avon] [cf. H2403 chatta'ah 'sin' Gen 4:7]; please [H4994 na],
Joel 2:32a //Acts 2:21
And it shall come to pass,
that whosoever shall call on the name of YHWH shall be saved.

30
* the name of Elohim (→ YHWH)
the name of my Fathera ░░ Jn 5:43; 10:25;
'in the name of Adonai' – Jn 12:13 //Mt 21:9; //Mk 11:9, 10; //Lk 13:35; 19:38.
'your name' – Jn 12:28; 17:6, 11, 12, 26; Mt 6:9 //Lk 11:2;
'name of YHWH' – Mt 23:39
'the name of the Father' – Mt 28:19
'His name' – Lk 1:46
[Note: the phrases are based on IRENT translation]

The Divine names and titles:

Elsewhere discussed in detail for problem of translation and for rationale and validity of IRENT
solution. Here is a list with brief notes.

The Divine name is alone for the Almighty Creator. All other names may be shared by more than
one. 'God' has a name – the name as a person, not because he is a person among many, but 'as a
person', since he is supra-person, the Ultimate Being.
"Call Upon the Name"

Jer 29:12 Then you will call on me and come and pray to me, and I will listen to you.

Gen. 4: 26, Ex. 3: 15, Joel 2: 32, Acts 4: 12, Rm 10: 13 etc.
[H7121 qara 734x] [Lev 13:45 'cry out – shout']
https://youtu.be/KjN-s1nMCnE
Why World Religions WILL NOT Call Upon the Name

Isa 12:4 And you will say in that day:

“Give thanks to YHWH,

call upon his name,
make known his deeds among the peoples,
proclaim that his name is exalted.

a
Coutts, <‘My Father’s Name’: A Survey of Research on the Use of onoma with Respect to the
Father in the Fourth Gospel>, Currents in Biblical Research 2017, Vol. 15(2) 248–260
www.academia.edu/37488452/My_Fathers_Name_A_Survey_of_Research_on_the_Use_of_onoma_wit
h_Respect_to_the_Father_in_the_Fourth_Gospel?auto=download&campaign=weekly_digest [A copy in
IRENT Vol. III - Supplement (Collections #3A.1 - God, Yeshua, & Names).]
31
• *Elohima (the God) vs. God

ělâhîn H427 elhin '*gods' – (Daniel 2:11, 47; 3:12, 18; 4:8, 18; 5:4, 11, 14, 23)

cf. ’ĕlôhim – H430 (2598x) Elohim - Gen 1:1,

god [H426 elah] – Dan 3:28; ê·lā·hă·hō·wn – ('the God' ho theos) - Dan 3:28a, b;

El 'god'

In most cases the expression of the arthrous Greek ho theos. is in reference to YHWH Elohim,
the Creator, [the heavenly] Father of Yeshua. IRENT consistently throughout N.T renders ho
theos ('the God') as ‘Elohim’,b not as ‘God’ by most translations of the Bible. Our English
convention does not use the definite article for this, which is from Latin usage in which there is
no articles in Latin.
'Elohim' often modified with a possessive adjective pronoun (my, your, our, his, their) – 'ho
theos + genitive pronoun'. In a few places an adjective may be interposed between the article
and theos. [e.g. Rm 1:23 'the imperishable Elohim']
(A) my Elohim – Mk 15:34 (Cf. //Mt 27:46); Jn 20:17; 20:28; Rm 1:8; 1Co 1:4; 2Co 12:21; Phi
1:3; 4:19; Phm 1:4; Rev 3:2, 12; [Anarthrous vocative – Mt 27:46 Thee mou! – (O my Elohim!)]
(B) our Elohim – Mk 12:29; Act 2:39 (YHWH Elohim of us); 1Co 6:11 (genitive); 1Th 2:2; 1Th
3:9; 2Th 1:11, 12; Rev 5:10; 7:4, 10, 12; 12:10; 19:1, 5, 6; Heb 12:29; Jud 4; [Cf. anarthrous
genitive Lk 1:78 Mercy ~.]
(C) yoůr Elohim – Mt 4:7, 10; 22:37; Mk 12:30; Lk 4:8, 12; 10:27; Act 20:22; Heb 1:9; Jn 20:17;
(D) their Elohim – Lk 1:16; 11:6;
(E) his Elohim and Father – Rev 1:6 [cf. 1Co 15:24 (Elohim the Father – taking 'Elohim' and
'Father' appositive)]
[Cf. anarthrous Jn 8:54 Theos humōn; our God] 2Co 6:16 (be their God); Heb 8:10 (be God to
them); 'God to him' Rev 21:7]

a
www.tdgordon.net/theology_2/anarthrous_theos.pdf
www.myredeemerlives.com/namesofgod/adonai-elohim.html
www.messianictorah.org/en/pdf/Chapter%203.pdf
www.gci.org/articles/does-elohim-refer-to-a-family-of-divine-beings/
www.gci.org/articles/is-elohim-a-plural-word/
(Elohim vs. El; Adonai vs. Adon).
b
Including Phi 3:19 'for them ~~ and Elohim is replaced by the belly'; Rev 22:6 "and the very Adonai,
Elohim of ~~" 'kai ho Kurios ho Theos tōn ~~'
32
 'Elohim' and 'Father' = (appositive). 'Elohim the Father'

≈ 'God the Father' Gal 1:1; 2Th 1:2; 1Tm 1:2; Tit 1:4; Eph 6:23; Phi 2:11; Col 3:17)

'to Elohim and Father– 1Co 15:24;

'Elohim and Father' – Eph 5:20; Jam 1:27; 2Co 1:3;
'to his Elohim and Father–Rev 1:6;
/our Elohim and Father– Phi 4:20; 1Th 1:3; 3:11, 13;

/from God, our Father, and Lord Yeshua Mashiah – Gal 1:3;
/God our Father – Rm 1:7; 1Co 1:3; 2Co 1:2;

Rev 4:11 the Adonai, yes, Elohim of us (our Elohim) – /our Lord and God – most;
Jn 20:17 "Elohim of me and Elohim of yoů"

• anarthrous ‘theos’
anarthrous ‘theos’ is variously rendered: 'Elohim' 'God' 'God-being' – also as 'a god' where in
reference to a deity other than YHWH Elohim. Notable examples are: Jn 1:1c, 18 ('what God
is') [Cf. Col 2:19
Simple phrase with genitive theou – God's or 'of God'. e.g. God's righteousness – Rm 1:17

[See below for ‘Translating God for Elohim’.]

33
 • YHWH

The word ‘YHWH’ in the Pentateuch:

• YHWH Gen 4:1, 3, 4, 6, 9, 13, 15, 16; 5:29; 6:3, 5, 7, 8; 7:1, 5, 16; 8:20, 12; 9:26,
and so on. From Exo 3:2 and on till the end of Num 23:3.
• as ‘YHWH Elohim’ from Gen 2:4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, 22; 3:1, 8, 9, 13, 14,
21, 22, 23.
• With 'Elohim' in a descriptive phrase –
Gen 28:13 ‘YHWH, Elohim of Abraham your father and Elohim of Isaac;
Exo 3:15 as in the phrase "Say this to the sons of Israel: 'YHWH, Elohim of your
forefather, Elohim of Abram, Elohim of Isaac and Elohim of Yaakob, has sent me
to you.' This is my name eternal (> forever), and by this I shall be remembered
[H2143 zeker (23x) 'that which is remembered'] /xx: this is my memorial –
NET; /xx: this is my memorial – KJV; xx: this is my Memorial-name -
NASB) from generation to generation." (The underlined is quoted in Mt
22:32; //Mk 12:26; //Lk 20:37).
‘YHWH, Elohim of Israel’ – Exo 5:1; 34:23;
‘YHWH our Elohim’ – Exo 5:3; 10:25, 26;
‘YHWH your Elohim’ – Exo 10:17; 34:24, 26; Lev 18:2, 14, 30; 19:2, 3, 10, 25,
31, 34, 36; 20:24, 23:22, 28; 25:17; 55; 26:1, 32; Num 10:9;
‘YHWH my Elohim’ – Num 22:18;
‘YHWH their Elohim’ – Lev 26:44;
‘YHWH, Elohim of Hebrews’ – Exo 3:18; 10:3. [cf. Elohim of Hebrews Exo 5:3]
‘YHWH, Elohim of the host (H6635 tsaba), YHWH is his name to be remembered
(H2143 zeker) – Hos 12:5
• As ‘YHWH Gen 4:1, 3, 4, 6, 9, 13, 15, 16; 5:29; 6:3, 5, 7, 8; 7:1, 5, 16; 8:20, 12;
9:26, and so on. From Exo 3:2 and on till the end of Num 23:3.
• With the word ‘name’ associated with YHWH – Gen 4:26; 12:8; 13:4 and 26:25
as in the phrase ‘to call on the name of YHWH’.
Exo 6:3 ‘my name YHWH’;
Lev 24:16 ‘YHWH’s name’.

• *Adonai vs. YHWH vs. LORD > Lord

For Gk. Kurios as a title of Elohim (the God of the Scripture) and Yeshua (the risen and
exalted Mashiah) in the NT, most English translations inattentively render it as ‘Lord’
(while in OT as 'the LORD'). In not a few places this leads the readers to confusion as to
who is referred to.a
Freed from doctrinal or theological constraints IRENT takes in only a linguistic and
literary consideration, which is based on the principle of logic and reasoning.
Thus, when the word is found to refer to the very God who has revealed His own name in
the Scripture, it is rendered not as ‘Lord’ as most English Bibles do,

a
A typical example of confusion with ‘Lord’ having two different referents: Mt 22:43-45
where David is quoted calling the Mashiah as ‘Kurios’ (Lord or Master) and it the quoted
passage has the same word in Greek twice, one which is referred in the TaNaKh to YHWH
Elohim (as in LXX) and another one to the Mashiah for David’s.
34
 (1) but as YHWHa in a limited number of places, where His person-nameb
itself needs to be known. c
(2) in most places, as ‘Adonai’ (H136) [Gen 18:27, 30, 31 the Adonai (==
YHWH); Gen 15:2 as in 'Adonai YHWH') which is the way His name is
vocalized as in the tradition of Masoretic text of TaNaKh. Comparable to
‘LORD’ in some English translations of OT

[H113 adon 'lord'; Cf. ‫( אדני‬my lord) adoni Gen 18:3; 1Sam 24:6; Psa 110:1
(my lord/master).]

• *Most-High (> Most High)

S5310 hupsistos (13x) 'in the highest' (Mt 21:19; Mk 11:10) = 'in the highest'
(Lk 2:14; 19:38); 'the Most-High' (Mk 5:7; Lk 8:28; Act 7:48; 16:17; Heb 7:1);
'the Most-High' (Lk 1:31, 35, 76; 6:35)

H5946 elyon – El Elyon (4x) – only in Daniel (Dan 7:18, 22, 25, 27)

a
YHWH (/x: YHVH), the so-called Tetragrammaton in the Hebrew Scripture (TaNaKh). This
is seen as kurios in LXX, though a few early mss show the Tetragrammaton in paleo-Hebrew
script). In the Old Testament of English Bibles, some renders as Jehovah (ASV, NWT,
pronounced as je-HO-vā) and as Yahweh (e.g. JB and NJB, pronounced as ya-WHE). Many
simply follow the style of LXX, rendering it as LORD (all in capitals). KJV has it as Jehovah
only in a few places. See on the correct pronunciation in this file (‘Yahuah' vs. 'Yahueh’).
b
The phrase ‘person-name’ in distinction to ‘personal name’, denotes a name of being of
person-in-relation; not as used for a name as of a person of such as a human person. Elohim
has a person-same, not a person name, a name which belongs to a person.
c
His name has to be known and should not be left buried in the Greek language and thoughts.
It is so, not because a translator has decided to do so. Cf. Jn 17:6, 26 – here again it is much
more than having a focus and attentions on the spelling and the pronunciation of the name
itself and how often the name should appear on religious pages and speeches so that the name
is to our satisfaction to become well known. [The phrase ‘person name’, instead of ‘personal
name’, means the name of a person, not a human person, but a being of person-in-relation.]
35
• Kurios - Master > Lord.

When the Greek word Kurios refers to Yeshua, IRENT renders it as ‘Master’ in
the Gospels. The word has no inherent sense of 'divine being', 'divine person' or
'God' who is to be worshiped. The word ‘Lord’ is used in NT only when this title
is applied to the risen and exalted Yeshua, e.g. other than outside the four
Gospels – in the sense of 'Lord of Life'.

"one God – the Father and one Lord – Yeshua Mashiah" 1Co 8:6.

Ref. www.sil.org/biography/richard-brown Richard Brown and Christopher

Samuel, "The meanings of κυριος in the New Testament" – a copy in the
collection.

Ref. Albert Pietersma, "Kyrios or Tetragram: A Renewed Quest for The Original
LXX" – a copy in the collection.

• Yeshua > Jesus (= Iesus in KJV 1611 with J used for capital I in Gothic font.)

• Mashiah (> Messiah) > ‘Christ’

[IRENT do not use the English word 'Christ' as a translation word for Gk. S5547
(538x) Christos. Note: in two places in NT (Jn 1:41; 4:25) Gk. text has them as
transliterate of Hebrew word as S3323 Messias – IRENT renders it as
'MASHIAH' – in all cap and quoted. Here in these two places Gk. christos is used
not in reference to a person but for explanation of MASHAH. It is simply rendered
as 'an anointed'.

Cf. The word used for other than Yeshua – Heb 11:26 'the God's anointed leader'
in reference to Moses.
Cf. Yeshua – Heb 11:26 'the God's anointed leader' in reference to Moses.

• Messiah > ‘Christ’ [rendered as such when it refers to self-claimed messiahs or

false messiahs] (e.g. Mt 24:5, 23; //Mk 13: 21)

To translate it as Christ, especially within the Gospels, is anachronistic, since the

word ‘Christ’ became to be equated to Yeshua himself and, moreover it is now a
Church lingo – burdened with too much unscriptural overtone as acquired
through the history of Christian religions. The English word 'Christ' belongs to
Jesus of Church (in Western mindset); whereas 'Mashiah' belongs to Yeshua of
the Gospel (NT).

• Mashiah Yeshua [Pauline] [Christos Iēsous], Rm 1:1; 2:16; 3:24; 6:3; 8:1, 2; 15:6, 8,
16, 17; 16:4; 1Co 1:1, 2, 4, 30; 4:15; 16:24; 2Co 1:1; 4:6; Gal 2:4, 16; 3:26, 28; 4:14; 5:6;
6:15 v.l.; Eph 1:1; 2:6, 7, 10, 13, 20; 3:6, 21; Phi 1:1, 8, 26; 2:6; 3:3, 13, 14; 4:7, 19; Col
1:1, 3; 2:6; 4:12; 1Th 2:14; 5:18; 1Tm 1:1, 14, 15; 2:6; 3:14; 4:7; 5:21; 6:13; 2Tm 1:1, 9,
10, 13; 2:1, 3, 11; 3:12, 15; 4:1; Phm 1, 9, 23;
1Pe 5:10 v.l.

36
 Rm 6:11 v.l.; 6:23; 8:39; 1Co 15:31; 2Co 4:5; 1Tm 1:2, 12; Eph 3:11 (Mashiah Yeshua
our Lord);
Phi 3:8 M.Y. my Lord;
Tit 1:4 M.Y. our savior;
• Yeshua as Mashiah [in the Gospels] [Iēsous Christos – 5x in the Gospels Mt 1:1,
18 v.l.; Mk 1:1; Jn 1:17; 17:3. Not in G-Lk] />> Jesus Christ; /Yeshua the Mashiach –
Delitzsch; [Yeshua came as a Mashiah, and as a Mashiah king (Mt 27:11, 22) He was to
be put to death.];

• Yeshua Mashiah [Iēsous Christos Act 2:3; 3:6; 4:10; 8:12; 8:37; 9:34; 10:36;
10:48; 16:18; Heb – none; Rm 1:1, 5, 6, 8; 3:22; 5:15, 17; 14:25 = 16:25; 14:7 =
16:27; 1Co 2:2; 1Co 8:6; 2Co 1:19; 13:5; Gal 1:12; 2:16; 3:1, 14, 22; Eph 3:9 v.l.;
Phi 1:6, 12, 19; 2:11, 22; 1Tm 1:16; 2Tm 2:8; Tit 1:1; to
1Jn 1:4; 2:1; 3:23; 4:2; 5:19; 2Jn 2, 7; 1Pe 1:3; 2Pe 1:8, 14, 16; Jud 4, 21; Rev
1:1, 2, 4] Tit 2:13 (our savior YM) Tit 3:6 (YM our savior)

> ‘Jesus Christ’

"Yeshua the Mashiah" – beyond a Mashiah figure of a Davidic King for Israel.

• Cf. compound fixed phrase – Lord Yeshua Mashiah (e.g. Act 11:17; 14:10; 15:26;
20:21; 28:31; Rm 1:7; 5:1, 12; 13:14; 15:6, 30; 16:27; 1Co 1:2, 3, 7, 8, 10; 6:11;
15:57; 16:23; 2Co 1:2, 3; 8:9; 2Co 13:14; Gal 1:4; 6:14, 18; Eph. 1:2, 3, 17; 3:14;
5:20; 6:24; Phi 1:2; 3:20; 4:23; Col 1:2 v.l., 1:3; 1Th 1:1, 3; 5:23, 28; 2Th 1:2, 2; 12;
2:1, 15, 16; 3:6, 12, 18; 1Tm 6:3, 14; Phm 3, 25
1Pe 1:3; 2Pe 1:8, 14, 16; Jud 4, 21; Jam 1:1; 2:1, etc.); Yeshua Mashiah our
Lord (Rm 1:4; 5:21; 7:24; 1Co 1:9); the Mashiah Yeshua, the Lord (Col 2:5);

37
*Shared Titles of Yeshua with Elohim the Father

That Yeshua shares same titles/epithets as Elohim the Father does not make 'Jesus' God.
Title/Epithet Yeshua YHWH Elohim
*Creator (Gen 1:1; 1:26) @
Creator of the new creation Col 1:16#

Jn 4:42; 1Jn 4:14; Eph 5:23; -

Savior Phi 3:10; Tit 1:4; 2:13; 3:6;
2Pe 1:1, 11; 2:20; 3:2, 18;
Lk 1:47; 1Ti 1:1; 2:23;
Deliverer Lk 2:11; Act 13:23; 4:30; Tit 1:3; 2:10; 3:4;
Jud 1:25; Isa 43:11-
Shepherd Jn 10:14 Isa 40:11
‘*Savior’ – Yeshua Mashiah as the agent of God's salvation:
Act 5:31; 13:23; Tit 3:6; Phi 3:20; 1Jn 1:14
Cf. In OT 'deliverer' of the people – (H3467 yasha):
Jdg 3:9 (Othniel 'lion of God', a judge); 2:16, 18a (judges);
@ 'Wisdom' in God's creation work – Prob 3:19; 8:12; 22-30; Psa 104:24.
# Cf. 1Co 8:6; Heb 1:2 ('made the world-orders'); Rev 3:14.
Alpha – Omega ░░ [Α and Ω – first and last of Greek letters]
[Some Trinitarians find it as a proof text as their 'God Jesus' ('Iesus Deus'). Forcing to see a
pre-human Jesus ('God the Son') in OT and, here, in Genesis.
Cf. In Gen 1:1 the 4th Hebrew word ‫( את‬Aleph ‫ ת‬+ Taw ‫ = )ת‬equivalent to Gk. "Alpha – Omega" (Α Ω)
["Alpha and Omega" (Α Ω) – title for YHWH (Rev 1:8; 21:6) and Yeshua (Rev 1:11 v.l.; 22:13).];
Most leaves it untranlated. IRENT has it 'A – Z'.]

'Lord of lords' Rev 17:14; 19:16 -- [Cf. 'Lord of the lords' as to Elohim – Deu 10:17; Psa 136:3
[(H136 Adonai + adonim > H113 adon)]

38
"Alpha and Omega"; "the First and the Last"; "the Beginning and the End"
[Trifold parallel expression]
• the Alpha and the Omega
[Α and Ω – first and last of Greek letters – the two in the middle of God’s name
YHWH in Gk ΙΑΩ(Η) -- the first and last form ΙΗ, abbreviation of the name Yeshua
in Gk ΙΗΣΟΥΣ]
• [Beginning = ‘The First Principle - Cause of all things’ (‘that who has all begun’),
not ‘that which was begun’]
• [End = ‘The Last Principle – Goal of all things, not ‘that which will end’.]

In Revelation To YHWH To Yeshua

Isa 44:6; 1:17; 2:8
The First and the Last
Isa 48:12; 1:11 v.l. 22:13
The Alpha and the Omega 1:8 1:11 v.l. 21:6 22:13
The Beginning and the End 1:8 v.l.% 21:6 22:13
%
1:8 v.l. – KJV has this one only

Note: Someone shares titles with other does not mean they are identical or same. That
Yeshua is shares some titles for HWH of OT does not mean he is 'God' or he is same as
YHWH. [a degenerate Trinitarian idea.]

39
*Lord, LORD, Adonai, Kurios;
LORD, *Lord; Master; Adonai, Adoni, Adon:

Etymology of 'lord'

Middle English loverd, lord,

from Old English hlaford, from hlaf (loaf of bread) + weard (ward, keeper)

‘lord’ is a common word in English which is also used as other than a divine title, e.g. for the nobility in
British usage.

The Greek and Hebrew as well as English it is also used as other than a divine title – e.g. master of
household, master over servants, etc. “In the Pauline epistles, the truly significant title for Jesus is not
Messiah but ‘Kurios’. …… Kurios now expressed both the religious and political significance that Paul
and his converts saw in Jesus. …” (Francis Young, p. 19)

'Lord' in OT

'Lord' in OT

Adon (lord, master);

Adoni (my Lord);
Adonai
Baal

Kurios in OT LXX
Instead of transliterating, the use of the word kurios as the translation word of the
Hebrew Tetragrammaton in LXX is a source of identity confusion and God confusion.

S2962 kurios

S2962 kurios (722x). *LORD, Lord, lord, *master; owner;

-- master over his subjects (servants, slaves, workers, students, followers, etc.)
Ref. https://web.archive.org/web/20180201112814/http://www.21stcr.org/multimedia-
2013/1_article/kz_is_jesus_god_because_he_is_lord.html [an edited copy in IRENT Vol. III
Supplement - the collection #3A.1 <Is Jesus God Because He is Lord – Zarley>

The word 'Lord/lord' is used in reference to men or God-beings. It is used in English

as a title for men of high position or nobility. In the Bible most often it is used in
reference to Elohim and in the NT translations to Jesus. Here, the sense of the word is
'Lord of Life', much more than the basic sense of 'master' or 'owner'.

40
kurie! – vocative (120x)

sir! master! lord!

O Adonai! – Mt 11:25 //Lk 10:41 [Cf. NWT renders as 'Lord']

41
 The Greek word *kurios a in the GNT:

Gk kurios - which is referred to, Yeshua or Elohim? (in the Acts and in the Epistles)?

[Ref. “God or Jesus? Textual Ambiguity and Textual Variants in Acts of the Apostles”, in the
multi-author volume, Texts and Traditions: Essays in Honour of J. Keith Elliott, edited by Peter
Doble and Jeffrey Kloha (2014), pp. 239-54.]

Abstract from his essay:

“The correlation of God and Jesus in Acts, in particular the use of κύριος/ὁ κύριος for both,
produced a number of statements in which there can be a certain degree of ambiguity as to
the referent. At these points we often find variants in the manuscripts, which reflect efforts
of ancient readers to disambiguate the statements and clarify the text. They often seem to
have drawn upon the immediate context to help them judge matters. So, the variants are
artefacts of this exegetical activity of these ancient readers of Acts.” From
http://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2014/08/06/textual-ambiguity-in-acts-of-the-apostles/

Aside from its use in generic sense (uncapitalized)b, it is in reference either to Yeshua or the Elohim
(God). Anarthrous Gk. is usually in reference to the Elohim (except a few in genitive case). It is
equivalent to 'the LORD' (in all caps)c in OT English translation as in KJV.d On the other hand, when
it is arthrous (ho Kurios – 'the Lord'), it refers either to the God or Yeshua, which should be
determined by the context; only a few places the reference is ambiguous, giving the general sense of
'Lord/Master'.

kurios as to Yeshua:
(1) Master / the Master ░░ as a title for Yeshua throughout the Gospels, including Lk 1:43; 2:12;
Jn 11:2, Jn 20:28 e.
(2) Lord / the Lord░░ [it is used in IRENT translation as the title for the risen and exalted Yeshua
Mashiah – outside the Gospels]
a) e.g. 'the Lord Yeshua' (Act 1:21ff); 'our Lord Yeshua Mashiah' (Act 15:26ff); as well as in
the Apostolic Epistles – Col 2:7 etc. [See A Study on in End-note here 4.]
b) e.g. ‘Yeshua is Lord’: Rm 10:9; 1Co 12:3
The English word 'Lord' as used a title both for Elohim and for Yeshua carries the sense of 'Lord of
Life', not as a synonym of 'God' or with sense of divinity.

Unlike most Bible translations, IRENT renders it as 'Master' for Yeshua the Nazarene (as used by His
disciples) in the Gospels. Only when it is in reference to the risen and exalted Yeshua (that is, outside
the Gospels) it is rendered as 'Lord'. Capitalized when used for a title. It is a title for him, reflecting
His lordship to the risen Yeshua after His glorification, exaltation, and ascension (Act 1:9; Phi 2:9) and
the Pentecost event (Act 2).
…

aCf. a related word: Rm 14:9 ‘shall lord over [2961 kurieuō] both the living and the dead’]
b
Gk. kurios in NT is also used as other than a divine title just as the word 'Lord' is used in English as other
than a religious word.
(1) ‘master’ ░░ (house owner) – Mt 10:24;
(2) ‘lord’░░ (of generic sense) – 'a lord of sabbath' Mt 12:8 //Mk 2:28.
(3) 'Lord' (Act 25:26 as to Caesar).
c
Cf. 'LORD' or 'the LORD' in all caps in OT translation, such as KJV, intentionally replacing
Tetragrammaton (YHWH), making the name hidden, buried, and obscured.
d
This is tantamount to follow LXX scheme of rendering YHWH in MT text of OT as kurios.
e
Jn 20:28 'my Master and my Elohim' – IRENT; / > 'my Lord and my God' – most;
42
 ‘**Master’ –
As to Yeshua, the word may carry a nuance more than simple human ‘master’ (as a master over
a servant or disciples), since the Gospels were written after the epochal Resurrection event in the
history of our humanity and the ‘lordship’ which was for Elohim the Most-High is conferred also
to Yeshua as the Mashiah of YHWH as shown in the Acts and the Epistles, which reflects the
post-Easter kerygma of the Lordship of Yeshua over His followers and the New Creation through
him.

However, within the setting of Gospel narrative, it is anachronistic (proleptic) to apply the title
'Lord' to Yeshua during His ministry whether onto the lips of His disciples or others.

[In the Gospels, one example in Mt 7:21, 22; //Lk 6:46 where the vocative kurie is used in
reference to Yeshua. It is rendered as "O Master!" rather than "Lord!".

The word 'Lord' as a title is used in the RENTT only for the risen and exalted Yeshua the Mashiah.
with nuance (as of ‘Lord of Life’ is more than ‘Master, the owner, the boss’.]

[Outside the specific setting and context, the word ‘Master’ in English brings out different nuance
of a person skilled in arts, etc. (Some uses a title ‘Master Teacher’ – which does not refer to kurios
in the Scripture. The title ‘Master’ is not a suitable English word to be applied for the risen
Yeshua, considering also the divine Lordship conferred on Him, with the same title as to Elohim,
His Father. Cf. in Korean – 주 (主), 주님 (Lord, Master), vs. 주인, 주인님 (master, owner)]

(1) 'master' 'Master' –

(a) to servants; e.g. Mt 10:24; 15:27 [cf. house-master – S3617 oikodespotēs Mt 13:29 //Mt
14:14 //Lk 22:11]
(b) In the Gospels as the title for Yeshua (to the disciples and the followers). Often vocative.
(c) Act 2:34 my Master ░░ [arthrous Gk. = Heb. adoni (not Adonai = Elohim)] [Psa 110:1, quoted
in Mt 22:43 //Mk 12:36 //Lk 20:42]; [Cf. Psa 16:1 ‘I said unto Jehovah, Thou art my Lord’ (ASV).]
/my lord; /x: my Lord;
(d) Lk 1:43 my Master (arthrous) /my master – Delitzsch; /my Lord – most, JNT;
(e) Mt 9:38 //Lk 10:2 'the owner of the harvest' – Delitzsch; /> the Master - JNT; />> the Lord –
most;
(e) as *vocative (kurie), 'sir! – most renders so in Jn 5:7. It should be same in Mt 8:2, 5, 9:28; Jn 4:11,
etc. However, here, most has it as 'Lord'. Though it is used often to address to Yeshua, 'Lord' here as a
translation word carries different word picture and connotation of the Lordship.
IRENT Delitzsch JNT others
Lord! Lord!
Mt 7:22 O Master! 2x My master! 2x Lord, Lord!
Lord, Lord,
Mt 8:4, 6 Sir, Lord;
Mt 8:21 Master Sir Sir, - TEV, GW
Master!
Mt 8:25 Lord
….

When Gk. ho kurios is used as a title of Yeshua, IRENT renders it as 'the Master' in
the Gospel, the Master for his disciples. The English word 'Lord' is used only when it
is in reference to the risen and exalted Yeshua. When it is in reference to Elohim it is
rendered as 'the Adonai'. (E.g. Mt 5:33; Mk 5:19; Lk 1:6, 9, 15, 28, 46; 2:15, 23; Rev 4:11)
[Anarthrous kurios refers most of time to Elohim; IRENT renders it as Adonai or YHWH
43
purely on the linguistic and literary basis for translation. We have to deal with the word 'Lord'
(capitalized) as a translation word in NT which cause confusion on its two referents, Yeshua
vs. the God. This linguistic need is one of the main reasons why the divine name should appear
in NT. It is pathetic to see the name completely removed from the Bible translation, even OT,
in NIV version. Even when the subject they deal is 'God', many writings and books do not even
once mention the very name of God; in fact, their God is de facto a nameless God. All of the
terms or phrases in the doctrinal statement – 'Father', 'Son', 'Person', 'God', 'Spirit' as well as
'one' and 'not three' are not defined but simply assumed! God in the Trinity doctrine is nameless
[Cf. Mt 6:9].

A significant problem rises over the term 'Lord' as a translation word for English Bible
(esp. so for NT) because it is used in reference both to 'God' and 'Jesus' and the word
itself is taken as a divine title. This is further complicated by the use of the Gk. word
kurios to render the Hebrew Tetragrammaton (YHWH) of the Divine Name in LXX
translation. YHWH → kurios in Gk. → LORD in English → Lord → God → God
Jesus ('Iesus Deus')
Because of such confusion of referent, the word 'Lord' as appearing in the NT
translation is often ambiguous and should be remain suspect. Is Lord God or Lord
Yeshua? By saying ‘Jesus is Lord’, it is often read to mean ‘Jesus is God’ (in contrast
to 'Jesus as God'.

Just as any translation word in the text it is necessary to emphasize that <Lord is not 'Lord'>.
What do we mean by 'Lord' in English? It is in the same way that <God is not 'God'>, <evil
is not 'evil'>, <Jesus is not 'Jesus'>, etc. Without clearly defining how the word is used, the
statement <A is A>, even <A is as A> is apt to cause confusion and conflict in one way or
another.

A typical befuddling example is the translation of Mt 22:43-45 [KJV]. 43 He saith unto them,
How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying, 44 The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my
right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool? 45 If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?

'God' vs. 'Lord'

1Co 8:6 "one God-being – the Father; and one Lord – Yeshua Mashiah''.
Phi 2:11 "every mouth shall openly-confess that Yeshua Mashiah is Lord – to the glory of
Elohim the Father"
"The word kurios used in reference to Yeshua in the Pauline letters is not so much a way
of identifying Yeshua with God, but, if anything, is more a way of distinguishing him
from God." [Edited on James Dunn's] Cf. 'a divine lord' cannon be same as 'God']

"~ is Lord!"; "~ is our Lord". He is being worshiped as 'Lord'.

Someone is called Lord ≠ someone is God.

44
 Cf. 'that someone is worshiped' does not mean that person is 'God'. Likewise, 'to
worship someone as God' does not mean 'someone is God'.

Yeshua – (the) Lord. He was not called 'God' in NT. He did not say he is God; always
'Son', not 'God the Son'. He did not tell anyone to worship him as God. He is not 'Jesus' of
'God Jesus' ('Iesus Deus') religion.
Phi 2:11 "shall confess that Yeshua Mashiah is Lord"
1Co 8:6 "… there is one God – the Father; and one Lord – Yeshua Mashiah;
1Co 12:3 "… can say 'Yeshua is Lord'"
Rm 10:9 "… confess Yeshua is Lord"
Cf. 1Tm 3:16 – 'who' Gk. ΟC (Ὃς hos) is corrupted to ΘC (a nomina sacra for theos with a strike
over the letters) – compared another example (O OC) (← ho theos) in 4:3 in Codex Alexandrinus.
This was incorporated into TR which was used for KJV.
www.bible-researcher.com/alexandrinus4.html

45
 (2) 'Lord' – a
Anarthrous: 'Lord' – as to Elohim
(a) 'Father, Lord of the heaven and of the earth' – Mt 11:25 //Lk 10:21;
(b) 'Elohim ~~ being ~~ Lord of heaven and earth' – Act 17:24]

Anarthrous: 'Lord' – as to the risen and exalted Yeshua.

(a) 'Yeshua is Lord' (Rm 10:9; 1Co 12:3); 'Yeshua Mashiah is Lord' (Phi 2:11);
(b) Lk 2:11 'Mashiah, Lord'; Act 2:36 'both Lord and Mashiah'; Act 10:36 'Lord of all'; 1Pe 3:15
'the Mashiah as Lord'
(d) Act 9:6, 10, 13; 10:14; 11:8; 22:19; Rm 15:9 'O Lord'
(e) Rev 17:14; 19:16 'Lord of lords' --- Cf. 1Co 8:5; 1Tm 6:15
-- [Cf. 'Lord of the lords' as to Elohim – Deu 10:17; Psa 136:3] [H136 Adonai + adonim > H113
adon]
Cf. 'a lord of the sabbath' – Mt 12:8 //Mk 2:28;

(3) 'the Lord'

Arthrous: 'the Lord'

(a) (→ Elohim) – Rev 11:14 –'the Lord of the earth'
(b) (→ for the risen & exalted Yeshua (none in Gospels).
Act 5:14; 8:16; 9:1, 6, 10, 11, 15, 17, 27, 28, 35, 42; 11:16, 21, 23, 24; 14:3; 16:14; 18:8, 9;
22:10, 16; 23:11; 26:15;
1Pe 2:3, 13; Jam 5:7, 8; Heb 12:14; Rm 10:12; 14:8; 16:2, 8, 11, 12, 22;
1Co 2:8; 3:6; 4:5, 19; 6:13, 14, 17; 7:10, 12, 22, 25, 32, 34, 35, 39; 9:1, 2, 5, 14; 11:11, 23,
26, 27, 29; 15:48; 16:19, 22;
2Co 5:7, 8; 8:5, 19; 10:8, 18; 11:17; 12:8; 13:10;
Gal 1:19; 5:10; Eph 4:1; 5:8, 10, 23; 6:1, 10, 22; Phi 2:24;
Col 1:10; 2:6; 3:13, 20; 4:7, 17;
1Th 1:6; 3:8, 12; 4:15, 16, 17; 5:25; 2Th 3:3, 4, 5, 16;
1Tm 1:16, 18; 2:8, 14; 2Tm 2:20; 3:11; 4:8, 14, 17, 18, 22; Rev 14:13;
(c) (as to a King): Act 25:26 'the Lord Caesar'

a
In his ten epistles, Paul applies the word “Lord” (Gk. kurios) to Yeshua nearly 230 times, whereas he
calls him “the Son (of God)” only 17 times. The Lordship of Yeshua Mashiah is without a doubt the
dominant theme in Pauline Christology. Paul, unlike other NT authors, applies the title “Lord” as 'the
Lord' exclusively to Yeshua and thus never to the Father. For him, Elohim is “the Father” and Yeshua
is “the Lord.” For example, Paul writes that “there is but one Elohim, the Father, … and one Lord
Yeshua Mashiah” (1Co 8:6). Note: esp. anarthrous, it refers to Father – IRENT renders it as 'Adonai'
(or 'YHWH') throughout NT.
46
(4) YHWH or Adonai (in reference to Elohim) See the file <The Divine Name in NT
translations> in <IRENT Vol. III Supplement (Collection #3A.1)>.

<A> anarthrous kurios is usually in reference to Elohim the Creator – Rendered in IRENT
YHWH or Adonai
YHWH – Mt 1:22; 2:15; 3:3; 4:7, 10; 21:42; 22:37, 44; 23:39; Mk 1:3; 12:36, 29 (2x); 12:30; Lk
1:16; 3:4; 4:8, 12; 20:37, 42; Jn 1:23; 12:38; Act 2:20, 21, 34; 15:18; Heb 10:16; Rm 4:8; 9:28, 29; 2Tm
2:19; Jam 5:4; Rev 1:8; 4:8; 15:4; 18:8; 21:22; 22:5;
Adonai – Mt 1:20, 24; 2:13, 19; 21:9; 27:10; 28:2; Mk 11:9; 12:11; 13:20; Lk 1:11, 17, 25, 32, 38,
45, 58, 66, 68, 76; 2:9 (2x); 2:23 (2x), 24, 26, 39; 5:17; 10:27; 13:35; 19:38; Jn 12:13, 38;
Act 1:24; 2:34, 39; 3:20; 4:29; 5:9, 19; 7:31, 49, 60; 8:26, 39; 11:21; 12:7, 28; 13:10, 11; 15:18; Heb 7:21; 8:8,
8, 10; 10:31; 12:5, 6; 13:6; Rm 10:13, 16; 11:3, 34; 12:19; 14:6, 11; 15:11; 1Co 1:31; 2:16; 3:20; 4:4; 14:21;
16:10; 2Co 3:16, 17, 18; 6:17, 18; 8:21; 10:17; Eph 2:21; 6:4, 8; ; Col 3:24; 1Th 4:6; 5:2; 2Th 2:13; 2Tim 1:18;
2:19;

<B> arthrous ho kurios ('the Lord') when it is in refence to Elohim: 'the Adonai'
Mt 5:33; Mk 5:19;
Lk 1:6, 9, 15, 28, 46; 2:15, 22; 4:18, 19
Act 2:25, 47; 3:19; 4:26; 7:33; 8:24, 26; 9:31; 10:33; 12:11, 17; 13:2, 12, 47, 49; 14:23; 15:17, 35, 36, 40;
16:15; 18:25; 19:10, 20; 20:19; 21:14;

Heb 2:3; 8:2, 11; Rm 12:11; 1Co 7:17; 10:22, 26; 11:32; 2Co 5:11;
Eph 5:17, 19; 6:7; Col 3:22, 23; 1Th 1:8; 2Th 1:9; 2:2; 3:1;
Jam 1:7; 4:10, 15; 5:11, 14, 15;
Jam 3:9 v.l. ('Elohim and Father');

<B-1> arthrous ho kurios is mainly in refence to Yeshua:

• Rendered as 'the Master' as in the Gospels.
• Rendered as 'the Lord' for the risen and exalted Mashiah (i.e. outside the Gospels), including
'our Lord' ('the Lord of us').

(5) kurie (vocative)

(1) as to man: ‘Sir¡’ or 'sir!' (Mt 13:27; 25:11; 27:63; Lk 13:8, 25; 19:16, 18, 20, 26; Jn 12:21;
20:15; Act 10:4;
(2) as to Yeshua: Master! Sir!
‘O Master¡’ by disciples (Mt 8:2, 2l; Lk 22:38, Act 1:6, etc.); Mt 7:21; Lk 6:46; 13:25;]
‘Sir¡’ (Mt 8:6, 9; 9:28; 15:25, 27; 17:15; Mk 7:29; Lk 7:6; 9:57; Jn 4:11, 15, 19, 49; 5:7;
6:34; 8:11; 9:36; Act 9:5; 22:8, 10; 26:15)
(3) O Lord – as to Elohim: by Yeshua. 'O Abba, O Lord of the heavens and the earth' (Mt
11:25 //Lk 10:21)

Cf. Jn 20:28 'my Master and my Elohim'– not vocative but exclamatory. Grammatically 'the
Master of me and the God of me' with two distinct persons referred to. In the whole chapters
14 to 17 of G-John, 'the God' (ho theos - rendered as 'Elohim' in IRENT) is one and same –
whom Yeshua called 'my Father'.

47
[Note: Just as with Gk. kurios, the word Lord in English is rather generic and non-specific in
meaning. When it comes in religious usage, people easily associate it with a word-picture of 'divine
being'. The Gk. word itself is used not just for 'God' but 'Jesus' and other people as well. Its referent
is clear in the context, especially with the fixed phrases such as 'Lord God' 'Lord Jesus'.
When used as a translation word for the title of Yeshua, it is being used to support an unbiblical
idea of Jesus being God. The phrase in the 'notorious' verse Jn 20:28 'my Lord and my God' is now
recruited as an important proof text for the Trinitarian 'God Jesus' ('Iesus Deus').
[In what sense and (special) usage of the English word ‘Lord’, Gk. ‘kurios’ and also in Hebrew? –
related to a Christological issue. Ref. www.religion.emory.edu/faculty/robbins/Pdfs/BoussetOutline.pdf
Book Outline of Bousset (1990). Kyrios Christos: A History of the Belief in Christ from the Beginnings of
Christianity to Irenaeus.]

[The word ‘Lord’ (Gk. kurios; Heb. adon – not 'Adonai') – a term for a person with authority, i.e.
master. Unrelated to the person’s divinity.
YHWH is called ‘Lord’; King David was called Lord; Yosef under Pharaoh was called ‘Lord’. Yeshua is
called ‘Lord’. Caesar was called 'Lord' (Act 25:26) - That someone is call ‘Lord’ does not mean someone
is God. Cf. most English bibles translate YHWH in OT as ‘the LORD’ (/Lord – Douay) (/Jehovah – NWT)
(e.g. Psa 110:1). Lord God made Yeshua to be our Lord (Phi 2:9-11). [Cf. 'one God – the Father … and
one Lord – Yeshua the Mashiah' 1Co 8:6] https://youtu.be/7qouipBaIDo <Trinitarian Myth: Lord
= God>]

Yeshua as 'Lord' in his Lordship – is exclusively for the risen and exalted Mashiah – e.g.
Acts/Epistles/Revelation

Phi 2:11 Yeshua Mashiah is Lord ░░. Not called ‘God’, or ‘God the Son’, but ‘the son of Elohim’.
Rm 10:9 ‘Yeshua is Lord’; Rm 14:9 ‘the Lord of both the living and the dead’; 1Co 12:3]
1Pe 3:15 'Sanctify the Mashiah as Lord'
Cf. Lk 2:11 'Mashiah, Master' sōtēr ho esti Christos kurios (‘a savior who is the Christ the Lord –
KJV etc. But in what sense is the word ‘Lord’ used, other than an unbiblical idea of ‘Jesus is God’?)
Cf. Lk 2:26 Mashiah of YHWH (> the LORD).
Cf. Jn 20:18 ‘my Master and my Elohim’ [not 'my Lord and God'].
Cf. Kurie – Lord! Sir! E.g. Jn 20:15, etc.]

The phrase ‘*Lordship of Jesus’: – a technical jargon. What does ‘lordship’ mean? What does ‘lord’
mean and signify? Lord as God? God as Lord? Jesus→ Lord; from there on Jesus → God → and then
→ even 'Jehovah? [How or when 'Jesus' (→ Which Jesus, Whose Jesus?) became 'God' (→ What kind
of God? Which God?) by the Church in history of Trinitarian doctrine?] [Similar linguistic problem
– 'Jesus is Lord' → 'Lord' does not mean 'God'.]

48
 kurios in reference to Elohim:
IRENT renders it, esp. anarthrous, as 'Adonai' or 'YHWH':
(1) as Adonai [or for less frequent arthrous noun ho kurios as 'the Adonai' e.g. Mk 5:19;
Lk 1:9, 25; 2:15, 22]: a common Hebrew word ‫‘( אֲדֹנָי‬my Lord’ > adon ‘Lord’) a is found
suitable as the translation word to be used in majority of cases.
[E.g. 'the angel of Adonai' /the angel of Jehovah – NWT; /the angel of the Lord – most.]

[Cf. 4 occurrences of Kurios ho Theos 'Adonai Elohim' – Lk 1:32 ('Adonai Elohim'), 68

('Adonai Elohim of Israel'); Act 3:22 ('Adonai [your] Elohim'); Act 2:39 ('Adonai our
Elohim').]
(2) otherwise, the anarthrous kurios in NT is rendered as YHWH in places where the
Divine Name as such has to be clearly shown in the context and when the voice of the
speaker and the audience is appropriate – especially in the direct quotation of the OT text.
Gk. *anarthrous genitive Kuriou is mostly in reference to Elohim→ rendered as
'Adonai's' in IRENT, but, in two places, the context tells it is of the risen Yeshua,
rendered as 'Lord's'.b
• 1Co 10:21 potērion Kurio pinein (drink a Lord's cup) ~~ trapezes Kurio metechein
(partake a Lord's table). [xxx: 'of Jehovah' - in NWT.
• 2Co 12:1 eis optasias kai apokalupseis Kuriou – ‘Lord’s visions and revelations’
– translated as ‘visions and revelations ~ from the Lord’ in IRENT.

S1203 despotēs (10x)

Sovereign Master Lk 2:29; Act 4:24; 2Pe 2:1; Jud 4; Rev 6:10;
master(s) (for servants) 1Tm 6:1, 2; 2Tm 2:21; Tit 2:9; 1Pe 2:18;
Jud 4 "our only Sovereign Master and Lord, Yeshua Mashiah"

a
Adonai (pl.) – Cf. Adon is singular; Cf. Adoni (My Lord) – Psa 111 (110):1
www.hebrew4christians.com/Names_of_G-d/Adonai/adonai.html –
Adon - A title variously used to refer to men, angels, and to the true God of Israel, meaning “lord, master,
owner.” From the Ugaritic adn meaning "lord" or "father" and the Akkadian adannu, "mighty"
References: Jos 3:11, 13; Neh 7:61; Psa 12:5; 97:5; 105:21; 114:7; Jer 22:18; 34:5; Zec 4:14; 6:5.
Adonai. - Lord; often wrongly thought as a substitute for the Tetragrammaton; emphatic form of ’Adon
(Isa 6:1). Occurs 300 times in the TaNaKh. The first use appears in Gen 15:2 where Abram addresses God
as “Adonai YHWH.”
e.g. Adon YHWH, Elohim of Yisrael – Exo 34:23; YHWH, our Adon – Psa 8:1, 9. Adon is used for Yeshua
in HalleluYah translation (for what use of it?).
Rendered as 'Adonai' throughout in JNT by David Stern. Cf. ‘Adonai Elohim’, Adon, Adonai [Note. In one
place he even translates theos (anarthrous; ‘God’) erroneously as ‘Adonai’ in Rm 9:5.]
Ref. on how kurios is rendered in Korean translations: [심우진, “<개정개역판> 과 <새번역>의 ‘주
(KURIOS)’ 번역”, Journal of Biblical Text Research (성경권문연구) 2011 April No. 28 pp. 146-169 (in
Korean)]
b
Cf. adjective kuriakos S2960 (2x – all in reference to the risen Lord Yeshua) – Rev 1:10 en tē
kuriakē hēmera 'in the Lord's day'; 1Co 11:20 – kuriakon deipnon 'a *Lord's supper'.
49
 It may be rendered as ‘LORD’ (in all caps) in the style of English translation of YHWH in OT
(similar to LXX). However, a mere typographic device of capitalization cannot help the sense
come out unambiguous. Language is primarily spoken communication tool, not written code
system. It is same for ‘Elohim’ vs. ‘elohim’; for ‘God’ vs. ‘god’.] [Cf. in translation of the
arthrous Greek ho theos -- ‘Elohim’ vs. ‘Elohim’– the latter modified as in vocative or as in
your/our/my Elohim, Elohim the Father, Elohim the Most-High, Elohim our savior, etc.
Thus, to have it translated as ‘Lord’ as in most English translations keeps it ambiguous as to the
referent, a leaving the readers often confused. [See End-note here 5 for Lk 4:18-19 <A case
study for translating the very common Greek word kurios in NT>.]

Note: It is common Judaic practice to restrict the use of the word Adonai to prayer only. In
speech, even when not speaking Hebrew, the Jewish people would to call God simply use
HaShem, ‫השם‬, which is Hebrew for "the Name" (this appears in Lev 24:11).

The word ‘Lord’, be it in English, in Greek or in Hebrew: it is not exclusively applied to ‘God’ but
also a 'divine being/person' as well as to man.
‘Oh Lord!’ kurie! (vocative) – who is being called – Elohim the Most-High, or the risen Mashiah,
Yeshua? [IRENT renders as ‘Master!’ for men, including Yeshua the Nazarene in the Gospels (i.e.
Yeshua as Mashiah. e.g. Mt 7:21, 22; 8:2, 21, 25; 9:21, etc. As the risen and ascended Yeshua Mashiah
(but not because He is ‘God’ or He became God) the Greek title is rendered as ‘Lord’ – in the Acts
and Epistle.]

Lord – Gk. kurios; Heb. Adonai vs. Adoni ('my lord'); Adon ('lord')
An English word ‘Lord’ as translation of Greek word kurios, which in turn was used in LXX
to translate Hebrew word Adonai. However, it is also used to translate Hebrew
Tetragrammaton in OT in all caps ‘LORD’ in most English bible translations.
When the Greek word is used in NT in reference both to Elohim (the God) and Yeshua, we
have some confusion.
E.g.
Lord Yeshua – Act 2:36; 1Co 15:24-28
(David →) YHWH, you are my Lord– Psa 16:2
A typical example of such confusion is ‘Lord’ in Psa 110:1 [quoted in Mt 22:44 //Mk 12:36
//Lk 20:42-43. Act 2:3]
“The Lord said to my lord, …” www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/psalm110_1.htm
• ‘the Lord’ (ASV, GW, Douay, RV, HCSB, ISV, NIV, ESV) → the LORD (KJV, NLT) →
YHWH
• ‘my Lord’ (most)→ my Lord [‘Lord’ in what sense - king, divine man, angel, god - ??]
→ my Master - ISR
• Cf. NET; YLT ‘the Lord … my lord’
• Cf. Act 2:36 ‘made Yeshua [our] Lord and Mashiah’
[Heb. adon' (sir, mister, lord); adoni' (my lord), adono (his lord)]
[In the connective form, only in the plural: Adonai; lit. my Lords, my Sirs.]

a
Referent confusion of ‘Lord’ in English translations. A typical example is Mt 22:41-45 (The Mashiah,
David’s Son vs. Lord king) especially when reading traditional translations, such as KJV.
50
 https://jewsforjudaism.org/knowledge/articles/answers/jewish-polemics/texts/psalm-110-a-jewish-
perspective/

http://outreachjudaism.org/psalm110/
[… The correct and only translation of l’adonee is “to my master” or “to my lord.” The Hebrew
word adonee never refers to God anywhere in the Bible. It is used only to address a person,
never God. That is to say, God, the Creator of the universe, is never called adonee in the Bible.
There are many words reserved for God in the Bible; adonee, however, is not one of them. …]
www.angelfire.com/space/thegospeltruth/TTD/verses/psalm110_1.html
https://youtu.be/0u0Tg2nGjUk

https://web.archive.org/web/20101121123616/www.dbts.edu/journals/2005/Aloisi.pdf
Aloisi -WHO IS DAVID’S LORD? ANOTHER LOOK AT PSALM 110:1 [Copy in <RENT Vol. III -
Supplement (Collections #3A.1 - God, Yeshua, & Names)>]

Eventually some people making a monstrous claim that ‘Jehovah = Jesus’ identical and same
with the faulty equation of ‘Jesus =Lord = LORD = Jehovah).

When the disciples called Him kurie! is in the sense of ‘master; chief; teacher’ or is it in the
sense of ‘a divine being, a god’?? In what sense ‘Jesus is Lord’ (Rm 10:9; 1Co 12:3)? Why
should it be more than ‘Lord of our Life’ or ‘our Savior’ - vs. calling someone Lord as if he
is God?

To Yeshua Mashiah of Elohim, it is Adon in Hebrew (not to be confused with Heb. Adonai =
YHWH). However, IRENT retained the word ‘Lord’ in reference to Yeshua to the risen
Yeshua Mashiah, exalted to the right of Elohim; not for Yeshua during His earthly sojourn.
E.g. ‘our Lord Yeshua Mashiah’ as it appears after the Pentecost in the Acts and Epistle,
knowing fully ‘Lord’ as an English word is rather a generic and non-specific word, which is
applied to mostly non-divine.

Note: linguistically complicating factors – (1) Hebrew word Adonai in TaNaKh is also used as a
vocalization of the YHWH (the Tetragrammaton, the personal sacred name of Elohim) and (2) LXX6
has Kurios as the translation word also for this Tetragrammaton.

Note: In the most Christian writings (be it theological or religious) the English word ‘LORD’ (in all
cap) is a translation word for Gk. kurios as appeared in LXX for Heb. YHWH. That is, ‘LORD’ is
found in the place where ‘YHWH’ should have been. If LORD in all caps appear in IRENT-related
articles, LORD [sic] is meant – ‘intentionally so written’ (e.g. quoting from others) or as a heading.

51
* Jn 20:28 'my Master and my Elohim'
'my Master and my Elohim' (IRENT); 'my Lord and my God' (most).

Jn 20:28 my Master! and my Elohim! ░░ \ho Kurios mou kai ho Theos mou (the Lord of
me and the God of me). [not vocative but simple exclamatory] Rendered in consistent manner
throughout NT, IRENT reads ‘my Master and my Elohim [the Father]!

[Not refers to one person as if ‘my Lord and God’).] [Cf. ‘my lord!’ – kurie mou – Rev 7:14
= ‘Sir!’] [Cf. 20:17; also 17:3; 14:20; Cf. problem with anarthrous theos 1:1c – ‘the Logos’
does not denote Jesus or Christ] /my Lord and my God – most;

Thomas addressed to the Risen Yeshua, “ho kurios mou kai ho theos mou!”, usu. translated as ‘my Lord
and my God’.

my Master ░░ ≈ Heb. Adoni; [not 'Adonai' (of 'plural of majesty')] /xxx: Adonai – HalleluYah, Good
News of Messiah; /my Lord – most, CJB;

Even though it was in post-resurrection setting, Gk ‘kurios’ (nominative, not vocative, as exclamatory)
should still have the same nuance carried by ‘Master’, a translation word in IRENT for Greek word used
throughout the Gospel texts for the title of Yeshua (same as Jn 20:25 by Mariam the Magdalene). English
word 'Lord' (capitalized) may be used for a divine person but it is appropriate as title for the risen and
exalted Yeshua Mashiah. Thomas now encountered his Master, now risen, and through Him, he
encounters the presence of Elohim, who is with His people (Immanuel), in the person of Yeshua
(‘salvation’ from Elohim). The risen Yeshua Mashiah, exalted to be at the right of Elohim, is the Lord
(Phi 2:11 = Heb. Adon; not Adonai as translated wrongly in CJB). The tile 'Lord' for him is used
throughout from Acts to Revelation. In most Bible translations, the title 'Lord' is applied both to 'Jesus'
and 'God'. In IRENT, the word is translated as 'Adonai' or 'YHWH' and 'Lord' is only for Yeshua Mashiah
(as the risen and exalted Lord of Life).

Act 3:22 Adonai {your} Elohim > Lord {your} God –;

Lk 1:32, 68; YHWH Elohim > Lord God –
Rev 11:17; 15:3; 16:7 [vocative] 'O Adonai, El Shaddai' > 'Lord God Almighty'
Rev 4:8; 21:22 [nominative] 'YHWH El Shaddai' > 'Lord God Almighty'
Rev 18:8; 22:5 'YHWH Elohim' > 'Lord God'
Rev 22:6 'the Adonai, Elohim' > 'the Lord, the God'
Rev 1:8; 'YHWH Elohim ~~~ the Almighty' > 'Lord God ~~ the Almighty'
Rev 19:6 'Adonai our Elohim, the Almighty' > 'Lord our God, the Almighty'
2Co 6:18 Adonai the Almighty > 'Lord Almighty'

[In the Gospels the word 'master' (in relation to His disciples) is appropriate before his
resurrection and ascension, not 'Lord'. As a title for Yeshua, IRENT keeps the word ‘Lord’
for the risen Mashiah exalted to the right of Elohim. (Phi 2:11) throughout from Acts to
Revelation. As a translation word, 'Lord' in English may bring a word-picture of 'divine', but
not necessarily because someone's being God. The same title 'Lord' is applied both to YHWH
and Yeshua – 'Lord Yeshua Mashiah' and 'Lord Elohim']

[Note: CJB renders ‘Lord’ wrongly in Phi 2:11 as ADONAI – this is in all caps as throughout
his translation of NT; the Hebrew word is only appropriate when it refers to Elohim the Most-
High]

52
my Elohim ░░ /my God - most; [= the very Elohim, Father of Yeshua ←20:17. Cf. 14:20 –
‘Yeshua in Elohim; Elohim in Yeshua’.] [IRENT consistently renders ho theos (‘the God’)
as 'Elohim' consistently throughout the entire NT. E.g. Jn 1:1b. Here it is to be distinguished
from anarthrous kurios for a generic ‘God’ as in English, ‘God-being’ or ‘What God is’ (Jn
1:1c), in addition to pagan deities.]

The text is read by the Trinitarian mind that here ‘Jesus was called God’ taking the Johannine phrase as
'my Lord and God' or 'my Lord = my God'.

[Thomas, encountering the risen Master here, experiences the very presence of Elohim (as
Immanuel Mt 1:23). Here he is not confessing ‘Jesus is (his) God’.] [This should not be
understood as ‘Jesus is called (my) God’ here, or even ‘Jesus is Jehovah’, etc.]

Cf. In OT - 1Ch 17:17, etc. Psa 10:12, ~ YHWH; ~ El (~ kurie; ~ ho theos). In NT Heb 10:7.

Cf. Heb 1:8 ho theos – it is nominative, not vocative. It is 'Elohim' ('the God'). See EE there.]
[Here, the arthrous ho theos is distinct from the anarthrous theos (as Jn 1:1c variously rendered
as ‘God’, ‘a god’, ‘what God is’).] [Though a person Jesus may be called ‘a god, a god, or
God’ (Heb. el) outside the NT as in various Christianisms, he cannot be ‘the Most-High’ (‘the
Almighty God’). The idea that ‘Jesus ≈ God’→ ‘Jesus was made God’ and ‘Jesus became
God’ by the Church which fell into the influence of prevailing Greek philosophy and mindset
→ degenerates ultimately into ‘Jesus = Jehovah’.]

https://youtu.be/U-B7U0kIy8Q (John 20:28 What Thomas REALLY confessed)

As the Logos of Elohim, the one who sees Him, sees Father (Jn 1:18).
https://web.archive.org/web/20160322112533/http://www.angelfire.com/space/thegospeltr
uth/TTD/verses/john20_28.html
www.angelfire.com/space/thegospeltruth/TTD/verses/john20_28.html
https://goddidntsaythat.com/2010/01/12/q-and-a-how-do-you-work-o-vocative/

The text is in the setting of Thomas’s encountering the risen Master. Here Thomas
experiences the presence of the very Elohim (i.e. His spirit; Cf. Immanuel Mt 1:24). There is
no way Thomas who had been in Judaic as any disciples of Yeshua could have inspiration of
the Constantine Roman Christianism theology (Christology) of the Greek mindset! Both
kurios and theos are arthrous to denote that two are not the same and one. The two are distinct,
not same person. It is not 'my Lord and God'; it is not 'my Lord = my God'. Cf. Not to be
confused with anarthrous construction, as in pneumati kai alētheia (Jn 4:24) and en pneumati
hagio kai puri (Mt 3:11) used as idiomatic expression – not two separate entities here, but the
second noun as appositive or adjectival,

[See in Appendix: Jn 20:28 ‘my Lord and my God’ vs. ‘my Master and my Elohim’]

53
“In the name of LORD”

The translators need a careful reading when the Greek word appears in the special phrase ‘en
onomati kuriou’ (quoting from OT) (coming ‘in LORD’s name’) – [Mt 21:9; 23:39; Mk 11:9;
11:10 v.l.; Lk 13:35; 19:38; Jn 12:13]
It is commonly translated as ‘in the name of the Lord’, leaving the readers vulnerable to confusion
with ‘the Lord Yeshua’ – does the expression say ‘He is coming, carrying the title of Lord for
Himself’?

It is rendered as ‘in the name of Adonai’. Can the alternative option ‘in the name of LORD’ be
better than the traditional rendering as ‘in the name of Lord’ to bring its true meaning? However,
from the language point view, there is no improvement; since the text we have as the scribes wrote
down is a poor substitute of the text as we should hear as transmitted in oral tradition.

[E.g. Outside the Gospels, this phrase en tō onomati kurio occurs once in Jam 5:10 ‘[prophets
spoke] in the name of ~’. (~ Lord’s name – NET; ~ name of the Lord – Darby; /~ name of
the Lord – KJV, most)

Cf. It is distinct from a similar phrase with the arthrous noun, it is “in the name of the
Lord” With the *Lordship of Yeshua this title ‘Lord’ (in the sense of a divine Lord, not a human
master) for the risen Lord outside the Gospel books in NT.
(of Lord Yeshua) – Act 8:16; Act 9:28; Act 19:5; 1Co 6:11; Col 3:17;
(of the Lord) – Jas 5:14

The Lordship of Yeshua Mashiah after His resurrection onto His ascension to His Father is altered
in the Trinitarian line of (Christomonism) understanding the phrase ‘Jesus is God’. A linguistically
muddle expression and belief line of ‘Jesus is Jehovah’ or ‘The name of our God is Jesus’ (Mark
Driscoll on twitter), etc.a Yeshua is not the God (= Elohim; the Almighty, the Most-High), i.e.
Yeshua and the God as identical. Thus, Yeshua is 'God' – not he is 'the God', but he is 'as God'.
That means He is not a lesser being than God. Not as ‘God’ by which we may understand. He is
not the God (Elohim), but ‘He is God’ as God-being. [See *God-being; ‘what God is’]. When Jn
1:1c is translating the anarthrous theos, it is not 'the God' (ho theos as in 1:1b), but 'as God' –
'divine' is unacceptable for the translation word here (as in Moffatt), but 'of God' (genitive) is much
close to the nominative but adjectival noun.

a
Some claim “Y’SHUAH is YHVH Himself” (e.g. OvadYah Avrahami). The statement itself is a
contradictory illogical Humpty-Dumpty language – nonsensical linguistically, scripturally and theologically.
Quoted is here: “… He is the Human Manifestation of the Spirit Being YHVH (the Father, God) who is
omnipresent’, as Scripture is clear: There is ONE God Only. God has, as it were, never had a “Son” in Heaven
when “The Word was ‘with’ God’ (Jn 1:1). In the OT we just read about YHVH – NO Son! [- to be checked
on this statement]. Many Scriptures confirm that He knows or sees no One else next to Him, above Him –
HE is GOD Alone. John 1:1 completes the mystery with <… and the Word was God>.” (Correct translation
is: ‘God was the Word.” – this is a grammatical fallacy – ARJ). Compare: Mt 24:30-31 with GOD Who is
Coming (Ezk 12, Zec 14, etc.) Note Zec 12:10, YHVH speaking, “Then they will look upon ME (YHVH)
Whom they have pierced.” [Cf. The One who is to come - Rev 1:8; 3:10; 22:7, 12, 20]
54
Examples in other phrases:
• ‘Lord of the harvest’, ‘Lord of Shabbat’
• in the name of the Lord Yeshua Mashiah [See under the separate entity ‘*in the name of]
[‘name’ is here in metonymic use]
• ‘day of LORD’
Act_2:20; /of Adonai – JNT; /day of the Lord – LITV; /of the LORD – NLT; /x: of the
Lord – most; /of Jehovah – NWT; /
1Co_5:5;(~ of the Lord {/Yeshua});
2Co_1:14; (of the Lord Yeshua); 1Th_5:2; 2Th_2:2;(of the Lord {the Mashiah}; /> of the
Lord – JNT!; /Jehovah - NWT);
2Pe_3:10; (of LORD; /> of the Lord – JNT!; /x: of God’s Judgment – MSG; /Jehovah’s –
NWT);
• cf. Rev 16:14; 'the Great Day of the God' (Elohim)

55
Translation vs. transliteration vs. transcription:

Since personal names and other proper names cannot be translated, and only be
transliterated. Transliteration of these should accurately and closely reflect the original as
possible and not content with modern equivalent in English speaking culture and society.
Otherwise, it would be anachronism and bring ideas and word-pictures which are unbiblical
and alien to the Scripture. The pronunciation of the properly translated name cannot be
changed; only glyphs (written letter form) may change when the phonetic value changes,
e.g. Iesus = Jesus - of originally same sound with variation of font. When the sound of ‘j’
came into English and the pronunciation of the sound changed, the name should have been
written with different glyphs to keep the sound same, as 'Iesus', not 'Jesus'. Instead the
spelling remained with different sound. The result is to loss of firm linguistic as well as
theological connection to what the name originally represents and stand for. The name
became just a convenient religious name to fit in their theology.

[See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_transliteration for problem in transliterating

Hebrew words.]a

• Eliyahu > Elijah; Yosef > Joseph; Yeshayahu > Isaiah; Yisrael > Israel
• Mattithyahu > Matthew; Yaakob > Jacob; /x: James; Kayafa > Caiaphas
• Elisheba > Elizabeth; Mariam > Mary;
• Yehudah > Judah, Jude, etc. for all except one, Judas, the betrayer of his master.

• Shimon > Simon;

• Kefa > Cephas [Cf. ‘KEFA’ when the Greek text has Aramaic word transliterated –
same case for ‘MASHIAH’]
• Kefa, Petros > Peter; (only one place in Jn 1:43 ‘Petros’ is used when the text itself
introduces the Greek word to tell its meaning.)b
• Markos > Mark [Yohanan Markos (Act 12:12 (son of Mariam), 25; 15:37, 39) [Col 4:10 (Markos
-- BarNabba’s cousin) [Cf. 2Ti 4:11; Phm 1:24; 1Pe 5:13.] [= Markos of the Gospel of Markos]

a
Traditional words related to ‘priest’ are retained, though the meaning, usage, and significance as well as
connotation in English and Church languages are quite different from the original words in Hebrew:
kohen (pl. kohanim) = priest (priests);
head-Kohanim = chief priests [‘chief’ with a sense of only one chief]; high priests; leading priests.
Kohen haGadol = the High Priest; the Chief Priest. [Note: some translations use both phrases ‘chief
priest(s)’ and ‘high priest(s)’ – cf. in Gospels and Hebrews]
kehunnah - priesthood, priestly office/service
b
[Note – See what kind of picture the English Biblical names, ‘John, James, and Peter’ brings to the readers.
See how different their original names in the Scripture, ‘Yohan, Yaakob, and Kefa’ come to the readers! They
have to read the text as close to what it was in the original language and culture. As rendered so in IRENT,
these names belong to those who lived in the culture two thousand years ago, devout Judaic— totally unrelated
to Christian religions (aka Christianity or Christianism) which are tied down and enslaved in the modern
Western mindset.]
56
 • Yohan, Yohanan > John
‘John’ in English (a very common name); Iōannēs in Gk, which is transliteration of
Hebrew Yoḥanan, a very common name). For the sake of distinguishing several people
with this common name, IRENT renders it as follows.
(1) John – only in the title of the Gospel, the three Epistles, and the Revelation Not to
be taken same as the Apostle.
(2) Yohan – only for the Apostle. This name of him appears in the Synoptic Gospels,
NOT in the G-Jn! [a disciple (Apostle) of Yeshua. A Zebedee’s son and a brother
of Yaakob (x: James).]
(3) Yohanan – for all others
(a) the Baptizer. Not as ‘John the Baptist’;
(b) Yohanan Markos - Act 12:12 (son of Mariam), 25; 15:37 = Yohanan (13:5b, 13b).
(c) A relative of a Kohen haGadol – Act 4:6;
(d) another variant name of Yonah, father of Shimon Kefa (‘Petros’ > ‘Peter’) – Jn
1:42; 21:15, 16, 17. – only in footnote for mss. (Cf. Mt 16:17 bar-Yonah);
(e) Rev 1:1, 4, 9; 22:8; - probable same as the name in the title = the author (same
author for G-Jn and Epistles of John).
G-Jn, an abbreviation for the Gospel, is employed also as its author. He is probably the
unnamed disciple whom Yeshua loved (Jn 13:25ff).
[The translation of proper names should be ‘transliteration’ to be as close as possible to their original
pronunciation, given the phonetic system which varies in different languages. There are, however,
a few exceptions in IRENT – it is only to help the readers encountering a certain name which refers
to different persons in the text.]

Note on *gender issue in language:

[“… there is no connection between gendered language and gender identity” – quoted from Ben Witherington
III, Biblical Views: “Spirited Discourse About God Language in the New Testament,” in the May/June 2012
issue of Biblical Archaeology Review.]
In our current socio-political and cultural climate in the Western nations, where sexuality itself is confused
and marriage as such of covenant and family union is in danger of becoming downgraded to refer to some sort
of relation primarily of sexual copulation, we have so far become hyper-sensitive and at the same time
desensitized for a lot of things. Gendered language is one of these to which people becomes hyper-sensitive.
E.g. use of the word ‘man’ in generic sense of ‘common man’ ‘human being’ becomes unseated from its place
in lexicons and it by itself tends to confuse people whether it might refer to a male person unless the context
is clear. The pronoun ‘he’ becomes to be referred to only a male person, not to any person.
• “The use of gendered language such as ‘he’ ‘his’ ‘him’ or ‘father’ in reference to God has
nothing to do with maleness of God or a gender-biased patriarchy.” The pronouns of the third
person singular masculine are used (he, his, him) as the undisputed historic convention
followed and this simply corresponds to the grammatical gender.
• For 'man' (as a human being), except when the context tells a male person can be presumed
safely from the context, the nominative case ‘he’ is avoided. When ‘everyone’ ‘whosoever’
‘anyone’ is referred to, ‘singular they’ is adopted and ‘they’, their’, ‘them’, or theirs’ is used
in place of usual ‘he’, ‘his’, or ‘him’. See also ‘fellow brethren’ as a translation word in IRENT.
• Literary personification should not complicate the sense of the words in the text. Gk. neutral
pneuma (‘spirit’) should be taken with a neutral pronoun it, not with he. Gk. masculine
paraclētos (‘that which stands by’ – helper, counselor, comforter) occurs in Jn 15:26; as ‘= the
spirit of the truth’ (14:17; 16:13 > 'the Spirit of truth' – most) to explain the 'spirit'. Hence,
IRENT takes the neutral pronoun 'it' instead of the usual ‘he’.
57
C. *spirit'; *holy spirit; the spirit of the holiness; the holy spirit; the Holy Spirit

Psa
51:11 [Psa – Psalm of David]

51:10 Create in me a pure heart, O Elohim

Renew a steadfast spirit within me.
51:11 Do not throw me from your presence,
And do not take your holy spirit from me.

139:7 Where shall I go from your Spirit?

Or where shall I flee from your presence?

The holy spirit (to hagion pneuma) is the spirit of Elohim (= 'the spirit of Adonai' Act 5:9
which is synonymous to 'the spirit of the holiness' Act 5:4) – the personal, operational
presence and power of Elohim extended through the risen Mashiah to his followers. Not
supernatural being or essence. Nor 'impersonal force' or 'energy'. Not the third Person of
Trinity, God the Holy Ghost. In some context it is personified (treated as if a person in the
anthropomorphic language) pointing to Elohim Himself. Elohim is as spirit (Jn 4:24) –
'God the Spirit', not a separate 'person/Person' (the Holy Ghost' – KJV).

Most Bible translations do not bother whether the phrase is arthrous or not; they put it
simply as 'the Holy Spirit', capitalized to boot. Some do have <Holy Spirit> as capitalized
when it is a synonym or a personification. Unless when quoting the capitalized examples
verbatim, IRENT do not capitalize them for either 'the holy spirit', 'the spirit of the
holiness' or 'holy spirit'. It is simply because the presence of a modifier 'holy' and the
definite article makes it unnecessary to mark it by means of capitalization. The
capitalization misleads the readers to automatically associate it with the third Person of
Trinity God.

Capitalization principle in IRENT translation of Gk. pneuma:

(1) The translation word ‘spirit’ is not capitalized in IRENT except when the word stands alone without a
modifier (such as ‘holy’ or ‘of Elohim’) but in reference to God. IRENT renders the arthrous noun as
capitalized 'the Spirit', which is usually personified in the context; often in Acts. To make it clear the phrase
'of Elohim' is added. E.g. Act 2:4; 8:29; 10:19 ‘the Spirit [of Elohim].
(2) Arthrous 'the holy spirit' (to hagion pneuma) is simply 'the divine spirit of Elohim'. IRENT does not
capitalize
(3) Anarthrous 'holy spirit' (hagion pneuma) is God's spirit as something of God's gift to pour down on
people.
E.g. 'the holy spirit' is the God’s sprit. ‘Elohim is spirit’ (Jn 4:24). [≈ 'God the Spirit', Not a separate
person or another deity as in trinity formula 'God the Holy Ghost' or 'God the Holy Spirit' – 'a part of
three-person Godhead'.
Elohim is the Giver of the gift, holy spirit which is life-giving spirit to us. It is not a 'forgotten God'a.
1Co 3:17 'believers as God’s temple'; 1Co 6:19 “temples of the Holy Spirit”.

www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/13966-spirit
www.revisedenglishversion.com/Appendix/6/Usages_of_Spirit

a the title of a book (2009) by Francis Chan.

58
‘God the Spirit’ – Michael Welker’s ‘biblical-realistic theology, Stellenbosch Theol. J. 2016, Vol 2, No
1, 463–490 [DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17570/stj.2016.v2n1.a23 ]
https://claudemariottini.com/2014/08/26/the-spirit-of-god-in-genesis-12/
the first essay in the book [Presence, Power, and Promise: The Role of the Spirit of God in the Old
Testament by David Firth and Paul Wegner] …. The essay, “Breath, wind, spirit and the Holy Spirit
in the Old Testament” (pp. 25-37), was written by Richard E. Averbeck and it deals with the basic
meaning of the Hebrew word rûaḥ translated as “spirit” in our English Bibles.

• 1Kg 18:45 clouds and wind

• Gen 7:15 all flesh in which there was the breath of life.
• Ecc 3:19 … humans and animals – all have the same breath.
• Of man – Gen 45:27 … the spirit of their father Yaakob revived.
• Of God – Sam 11:6 'the spirit of Elohim came upon Saul
• [breath/spirit] of YHWH – 2Kg 2:16
• wind – 2Kg 2:16
• Gen 1:2 - /the Spirit of God – most; /the spirit of God – JPS, Douay; /God's Spirit – NHEB,
WEB; x: a wind from God – NRSV; Aramaic Targum Onkelos; /x: a mighty wind – NAB;
/x: God's breath – The First Testament; /xxx: God's active force (Fn. Or God's spirit) –
NWT; /[spirit hovering' or 'wind moving/sweeping blowing' with Heb. meraḥephet]
rûaḥ elohim – 'wind of God' vs. 'mighty or strong wind''

[Cf. (1) A word or phrase may be often used metonymic and should not be confused with
what is believed to be its ‘literal meaning’. Cf. ‘sin’ – nature, power, guilt, even sacrifice.
(2) The Gk. article makes a word immeasurably changed its sense and usage in the text –
with particularization, referencing, and identification. When an article is arbitrarily inserted
into, or deleted from the text, and the sense of the text changes, it is from negligence,
ignorance, or deliberation. Conflict with English grammar comes into play as well. E.g. the
noun ‘evil’ without article in English for an abstract idea is arthrous in Gk. The arthrous
Gk. is equivalent to ‘the evil someone/something’ in English. The problem of arthrous ho
theos ('the God') vs. anarthrous theos (‘God’) is dealt in much detail in this article.]

1Sam 16:14 a spirit (x: the Spirit - most; / the spirit - ERV) of YHWH
Job 33:4 spirit of El
Spirit of Elohim (ruach Elohim) – there is no phrase with arthrous noun 'the spirit of Elohim'
in OT.
Ezk 11:24 the spirit; ~~ spirit of Elohim
Gen 1:2; 41:38; Exo 31:3; 35:31; 1Sam 10:10; 11:6; 19:23; 2Ch 15:1; Num 24:2
Cf. 1Sam 16:23 (a tormenting? spirit from God); 16:15 a tormenting */x: evil spirit from
God ??)
"The Adonai is the spirit" – 2Co 3:17 ('the Adonai' - /Jehovah – NWT; /the Lord – most);
"Elohim is spirit" – Jn 4:24 (/God is spirit – most; /God is Spirit; /xxx: God is a Spirit – KJV)
Cf. 'the holy spirit' (aka the Holy Ghost in KJV) is not a separate being or person as pictured by the
Trinitarian mind. It is the very spirit of Elohim who is in act to reach ('proceed') the creation. Cf.
/Filioque (a Roman Catholic doctrinal creation).

1Co 15:45 'the last Adam became a life-giving spirit'

Rm 8:2 (the law of the spirit of life in Mashiah Yeshua)
59
The word ‘spirit’ – in English, Greek, Hebrew
[See also in <Walk through the Scripture #3B - Man, Anthropology, and Religion>

Vocabulary (different meaning, sense, association, word picture, usage):

영 (靈); 혼 (魂); 혼령 (魂靈);영혼 (靈魂); 정신 (精神); in Korean
spirit, ghost, soul

[spirit of man, of God, of evil, or of things.]

Spirit
Power, forcea, work, 'impersonal force' – in physic terms;
energy, radiation vs. matter
spirit-being, ghost, 'soul'

The word is rendered in KJV some places as ‘*ghost’ in the phrase ‘the Holy Ghost’,
while in some places as 'that holy Spirit' 'the holy Spirit of God' 'his holy Spirit'.
Heb. Ruach – breath, wind, spirit; “From the west shall they revere the name YHWH; from the rising of
the sun His glory. When the foe comes like a flood, the wind of YHWH shall lift up a banner against him.”
(Isa 59:19) “The Spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life.” (Job
33:4)
Cf. ‘angel pneumatology’;
Ref. Gischen (1998), Angelomorphic Christology (pp. 114-119). Cf. it is more accurate that a common term
‘angel Christology’
… he defines ‘angel’ as ‘a spirit or heavenly being who mediates between the human and divine realms’ …
(p. 27).

*Invisible things in the physical world (describable in terms of physics):

*things the framework of space-time
Things may not be 'visible' if too small, e.g. 'particles'; if too far into the universe, if not sensible to
vision - e.g. radiation energy, invisible light (IR or UV or beyond.
'spirit' is in the invisible realm, just as 'energies' - may be able to sense in our 'spirit'.
Cf. 'imperceptible'

a Cf. "the Force" (e.g. in Star Wars 'May the Force be with you.')
60
*holy spirit, vs. ‘the holy spirit’, ‘the Holy Spirit’, ‘the Holy Ghost’ (KJV); spirit/Spirit;

Needs Editing

[Cf. (a) holy spirit vs. the holy Spirit] [definition of ‘ghost’ in English usage]

Regrettably most Bible translations failed to pay due attention to the presence or absence of the Greek
article, esp. dealing with the very common words ‘God’ and ‘spirit’. This point is very important. In
IRENT, the arthrous ho theos (‘the God’) is consistently rendered as ‘Elohim’, not ‘God’. E.g. Jn 1:1.
Here when there is no definite article for the Gk. word pneuma (‘spirit) is consistently rendered simply
as ‘spirit’ (with no definite the or indefinite article a a) whereas Gk. to pneuma to hagion (‘the holy
Spirit’) being capitalized only the word ‘Spirit’, for as indication for its claimed personhood, but for
its source to be God himself.

“… the presence or absence of the article with pneuma (hugion) is neither accidental nor arbitrary.
Ra1her, it will be argued that the anarthrous usage of pneuma (hugion) represents the unmarked or
default usage within the New Testament. …”
[Steve Swartz, “The Holy Spirit: Person and Power. The Greek Article and Pneuma”, Bible
Translator Vol. 44, No. 1, 1993; pp. 124–138] [Stephen H. Levinsohn, “Anarthrous
References To The Holy Spirit: Another Factor” Bible Translator Vol. 44, No.1, 1993; pp.
138-44] Note: Both articles are found in IRENT Vol. III – Supplement (Collection #3B).

[See also Ronald D. Peters, “The Greek Article – a Functional Grammar of Ὁ-items in the
Greek New Testament with Special Emphasis on the Greek Article” Linguistic Biblical
Studies, Vol. 9, 2014. Esp. on ‘The article with nouns”, pp. 229-247.]

‘The Holy Spirit’ as most Bibles translates the two Greek expressions, to pneuma to hagion
(rendered as 'the spirit of the holiness') and to hagion pneuma and 'the holy spirit' in IRENT) is
the Spirit of Elohim (Gen 41:38, etc.) = ‘the Spirit of YHWH’ in OT. Cf. ‘His/Your holy Spirit’.
The holy spirit is the very spirit of Elohim ['breath' in Hebrew] - the Spirit is the very presence
and power of Elohim in action. “Elohim is as spirit” (Jn 4:24 /x: a spirit). None other than the
very God acting/creating in power manifested in the works of Yeshua. Father belongs to no one;
all others (the Son, the Spirit, man) belongs to Him. [Cf. the spirit of Mashiah; the spirit of
man; the spirit of the world. Cf. ‘spirit’ of inanimate object or ideas. Cf. apparition,
ghosts.]

[Cf. the common church lingo 'baptism in the Holy Spirit' does not appear in the Bible. Cf. Act
11:16 'immersed in holy spirit'.]

Ezk 11:5, the Spirit of YHWH fell upon me and said (- KJV, etc.; /x: he said) to me: “Say: Thus,
says YHWH: <You are saying these things, O house of Israel, but I know what you are thinking
…>” [Here, it said, ‘the Spirit says’, but it is not other than YHWH Himself speaking and giving
commandments.]

Cf. Mt 12:31-32; [blasphemes against the Spirit (of Elohim)]; //Lk 12:10 [blasphemes against
the holy spirit] – the blasphemy is against Father – the Spirit is the spirit of Elohim, not another
person or god-being as God the Holy Ghost separate from Father.]

a
Cf. noun which is uncountable or used as uncountable.
61
= [+ by rejecting God’s testimony, the Spirit gives on the son-of-man as to who He is (Jn 15:26)
and the plans of God.] [It is the blasphemy against Father. The Spirit is the Spirit of Elohim, not
a separate ‘Person’ or ‘Force’ from Father.] The Trinitarian God is one spirit; the Holy Ghost is
another spirit. They are not same because they are labelled as persons. A person’s spirit cannot
be same as another one’s spirit. To them two different spirits (two different persons, not two
different it’s) speak and do, being different and independent to the other. Tritheistic and
Sabellianism in disguise – three in different modes but not at various times.
[https://youtu.be/DIBBQEPhFz0 Holy Spirit and blasphemy.]

• Ref: Hans Küng (1992), Credo – The Apostles' Creed Explained for Today, [Ch. 5. Holy
Spirit: Church, Communion of Saints and Forgiveness of Sins, pp. 122-157.]
• Ref: Steve Swartz (1993), "The Holy Spirit: Person and Power. The Greek Article and
Pneuma", Bible Translator Vol. 44, No. 1, 1993; pp. 124–138
[A scanned copy in ((WB #3A)) collection.] [online read →
www.ubs-translations.org/tbt/1993/01/TBT199301.html?num=&x=0&y=0&num1=124 ]

• Ref: www.21stcr.org/multimedia-2012/1-articles/sf-unitarian_view_holy_spirit.html

‘The holy spirit’ is none other than the spirit of Elohim – not a separate person or another God or God-
being (Jn 4:24 Elohim is as spirit and Elohim is spirit). It is the spirit divine (hence capitalized), the spirit
belonging and from Elohim; not a ‘divine person’, not a divine spirit-being. Elohim is as the holy spirit.
Likewise, the Word (Jn 1:1) is none other than the Word of Elohim. It is Elohim in His spirit that acts to
the creation. What the Spirit does (says, commands, teaches, etc. as personified) is what Elohim in his
spirit does. (e.g. Lk 12:12; cf. ‘the Spirit said’ in Act 8:29; 10:19; 11:12; ‘Adonai's spirit took Philip
away’ Act 8:39 (Adonai – anarthrous genitive ‘kurio’). Cf. Mt 10:19 – ‘it is the Spirit of Father is speaking
through you.’ – does it refer to the Spirit of Elohim, or to the third person of Godhead, call God the Holy
Ghost? What spirit is, Elohim is – His essence. Note: As titles are for function of description, not
identification, that Yeshua is given title of ‘Word of Elohim’ in NT should not make to read that the Word
in Jn 1:1 is same as Jesus or Christ.

The spirit of Elohim, God’s spirit, the holy spirit is the power of God in act for creation and
love. It is the very God in His act, not a separate ‘person’. As He creates by His spoken
word (‘Logos’) [← 'Elohim created' (Gen 1:1); 'Elohim said' (Gen 1:3, 6, 9, 11, 14, 20, 24,
26)], the word of Elohim is the very God in His act, not a separate ‘person’.

[‘spirit’, NT translation word of Gk. pneuma, is used either as a countable or un-countable noun.
It requires careful wording – spirit, a spirit, the spirit, spirits, Spirit, etc.
The term ‘holy spirit’ is not ‘a holy spirit’ (countable noun).
E.g. *Jn 4:24 'Elohim is as spirit'; /xxx: ‘God is a Spirit’ – KJV, NWT; /God is Spirit – GNB,
WNT; /God is spirit – ESV; [‘God is spirit’ – what does it mean by ‘spirit’? Then, what would
‘spirit of God’ be? [See below *Jn 4:24]

Cf. The English expression ‘a spirit’ (one of many spirits) has different sense and usage than
outside the Bible – syn. with ‘idea’ ‘philosophy’ etc.

[Note: when it is used alone without adjective ‘holy’, the phrase ‘the spirit’ needs to be
capitalized when it is personified for God in act, to help differentiate from generic spirit (such
as of man, of thing, of ideas, etc.). That is, ‘the Spirit’ = ‘the holy spirit’ = the Spirit of Elohim.
Cf. ‘the Holy Spirit’ (or 'the Holy Ghost', :-< a nice name) as capitalized is the form applied to
a third Trinitarian god.]

62
[In the NT ‘the holy spirit’ – is the spirit of Elohim – refers to Elohim in act in power – (1) not
an impersonal force; nor such a force from God; (2) it is neither a ‘person’ who is equally God
with the Father in heaven, unless (contrary to common English usage) the term is used in the
original sense of Latin word persona (as actor in a drama). That the term is used in a literary
device of personification has been a great stumbling-block for many who think only in
Trinitarian mindset. Neither literary personification nor grammatical gender of a noun can make
it a ‘person’ (whatever the word person means). God acts – as if in different persona (actor) –
all depending on how God is presented in the text (narratives, statements, or arguments) of mere
human language. Grammatically speaking, ‘the Spirit of Elohim’ may be of appositive genitive
construction, rather than 'spirit' which Elohim possesses.

‘spirit’ – breath, wind, life (force). The word ‘spirit’ is equivalent to ‘breath’ or ‘wind’ in
Hebrew. The Spirit of Elohim is inseparable from His will, power, life (force), and love. God’s
will is of what God is; God’s power is of what God is; God’s life force is of what God is. So is
the Spirit – God’s spirit is of what God is. The word ‘holy spirit’ is spirit which is holy, divine,
that is, it is Spirit of God. All these are conceptually inseparable, since these are intrinsic to God
Himself with the Spirit to proceed from God towards the Creation. These are part and parcel of
God’s essence and nature – not a separate being, a separate ‘person’, whatever they mean the
word ‘person’a. The Spirit of Elohim = the holy spirit - God acting in His power on the believers
and the Mashiah community through the person of the risen Mashiah; the same power acted on
the believers. Throughout the NT, “holy spirit is holy spirit is holy spirit”. The holy Spirit is
neither a force, nor impersonal force (cf. the term ‘force’ in physics). It is the very power in
which God acts and radiates to the created world.b

Two different phrases, the arthrous phrase ‘to pneuma to hagion’ (rendered as 'the spirit of
the holiness) vs. anarthrous phrase ‘pneuma hagion’ (rendered as 'holy spirit') (Lk 1:35, 11:13,
etc.) are thematically same; they are kept distinguished in IRENT– to help find the underlying
Gk.

In the arthrous phrase ‘the holy spirit’ or 'the spirit of the holiness, the presence of a definite
article particularizes the word and has nothing to do with whether the entity is a person or a
Person (the latter is a Trinitarian theological jargon). It is the context (local and in the whole
Bible) that determines its precise sense. Frequent in the Acts, ‘the Spirit’ is a short hand for ‘the
holy spirit’. As a grammatical agent [/subject] of the sentence it is personified, e.g. ‘the Spirit
says …’ – such *personification is a common literary device. Thus, the spirit of God stands for
the agent of action, that is, none other than God Himself.

When the Spirit is taken as the third Person of Godhead in the Trinitarian lingo, it ignores what
‘spirit’ means, and what ‘holy spirit’ means. The holy spirit as the giver [i.e. = Elohim himself]
is confused with holy spirit as a gift. A typical example is: ‘Receiving of holy spirit’ in Jn 20:22
is confused with ‘being immersed in holy spirit’ in Act 1:5, 8; “giving of the holy spirit, the
promised gift’ in Act 2:4. All this is because of fundamentally faulty grasp of the meaning of
‘spirit’ and ‘holy spirit’, which is the result of unbiblical Trinitarian formula of three-person
Godhead.

An honest approach to the notion of ‘holy spirit’ which affects translation work requires readers
are free of a non-Scriptural idea of its being a person, or one of the three Persons, as understood
by the tri-theistic Trinitarian position. Any hint of illogicality should not be removed from our
thought and speech. That it is not a person does not mean it is something like impersonal ‘power’

a
See elsewhere on the word ‘person’ – how it became a theological jargon, having derived from persona,
which is Latin word for Greek theological and metaphysical terms hypostasis: (‘being’ ‘existence’) and
homoousios (‘of the same being’ with ousia ‘essence, being, substance, etc.)]
b
Analogy is radian of energy, heat, light from the Sun.
63
 or ‘force’. Neither its grammatical (neuter) gender should affect how we think on what it is.
There are a few places a pronoun is taken for it. Most have it take a third person pronoun of
masculine gender if it is with God. E.g. KJV - a demonic unclean spirit is taken as ‘he’ (Mk
1:26), while the spirit of God is taken as ‘it’ (Jn 1:32)!
When it is arthrous, it may be simply that which is specified in the context in the sense of ‘the
aforementioned holy spirit’, etc. However, often, it is God Himself in action with power to be
flowing out (‘proceed’, ‘emanate’) – e.g. Lk 12:12 ‘the holy spirit shall teach you’.

On the other end, it is ‘holy spirit’ without the article when it is on the receiver (the one resonates
with the Spirit) as His gift. E.g. Lk 11:13 holy spirit is a gift of holy spirit; holy spirit as His
gift. To be non-capitalized and without the article. Cf. ‘the holy spirit’ when the phrase is the
grammatical agent of the sentence; (cf. ‘good things’ //Mt 7:11 – prob. wisdom and guidance
supplied in response to repeated requests – NET fn). This is correct way, keeping in harmony
with the Scriptural truths, to understand where ‘the holy spirit’ is seen in several places as if
personified, prominently as *paraklētosa (Anglicized as Paraclete) in G-Jn and also in such
expression ‘blasphemy against the spirit of the holiness’ (‘the Holy Ghost’ - KJV Mt 12:32).
Here, some takes these as proof texts to spot what fits into their idea of personhoodb of the holy
spirit – for the Holy Ghost as a separate, independent, third ‘Person’. We should not mistake
such a literary device as a theological device employed by the writers of the Scriptures
themselves which is in fact a convenient device to build up their unscriptural doctrines of 'God
the Holy Spirit'.

Since Greek word pneuma (spirit) is neuter, IRENT has it to take third person neuter pronouns
of it, its, and itself. [1Pe 1:11; Jn 14:17; 26] [Cf. the subject (the spirit) is in ellipsis in Jn 1:32.
Esp. in Jn 16:13-14, twice there are neuter third person pronoun ‘that one’. In several places
with the subject of verbs in ellipsis, where a literary device of personification is employed,
IRENT takes its antecedent as pneuma (neut.), instead of paraklētos (masc.).] [Note: the one in
position of the advocate (paraklētos) is Yeshua himself – 1Jn 2:1. Cf. another paraklētos
(‘advocate’ ‘comforter’ ‘helper’), the spirit of the holiness itself – Jn 14:26 – is not a person as
Yeshua was.]

In OT www.gotquestions.org/Spirit-Old-Testament.html

‘new spirit’ – Ezk 11:19-20; 36:26-29

a Gk. masculine. (‘alongside + to call’) – difficult to translate. That which is beside us, with us, and for us.
Variously translated as ‘helper’’ ‘counselor’, ‘comforter’, ‘consoler’, and ‘advocate’. In the text, it is
personified. [IRENT – ‘the one that which is called to ones’ side’] [This word is only in Johannine writings
(5 x). Jn 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7; 1Jn 2:1.] [a kind, compassionate, interceding and helpful friend. Prob. syn.
‘intercessor’ in Rm 8:26, 27, 34. Akin to mediator.] [as holy spirit = spirit of truth]
https://youtu.be/T4qzfEOvlwk The Comforter: Jesus
b
www.hebrew-streams.org/works/spirit/personhood.html
64
The Holy Spirit [‘the Holy Ghost’ in KJV] as the third ‘person’ of the Godhead in the unbiblical
Trinitarian doctrine:

• Nicene Creed (AD 325) (Roman Emperor Constantine I) — a binity of Fater and Son,
• Niceno–Constantinopolitan Creed (AD 381) (the second ecumenical council – Roman
Emperor Theodosius I) — a trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

The latter expanded on ‘the Holy Spirit’ by adding "the Lord, the Giver of Life, Who
proceeds from the Father, Who with the Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified,
Who spoke through the prophets".

The problem with taking ‘H.S.’ as person – (1) no clear definition of this term is possible;
anyone comes up something useful for their agenda; (2) the H.S. is treated as something
they have to deal with, completely isolated out of the text, having become with its own life
(= spirit); (3) it does not say what it is; ‘he’ does not say who ‘he’ is, having no name on
his own, on its own. That is, a nameless bogus Peron. This all because personhood (x:
personality) is confused with personification, a literary device which sits within the text.
[See on the definition problem of the term ‘person’ in the beginning part of this file.]

Whether it is arthrous or not, KJV renders it as ‘the Holy Ghost’ in 89x with both words
capitalized. Only four places it has as ‘the Holy Spirit’ in Lk 11:13 (the only instance in
the Gospels) and Eph 1:13; 4:30; 1Th 4:8. There are few old translations using ‘Ghost’.
It is ‘the holy spirit’ or 'the spirit of the holiness' in IRENT rendering.

KJV has ‘ghost’ and in 8 verses it is as in the phrase ‘give up the ghost’ (an idiom for ‘die’):

(1) for the verbal phrase ‘aphiemi to pneuma’ (literally ‘give out the spirit’) Mt 27:50;
Mk 15:37, 39; Lk 23:46; Jn 19:30;
(2) and for the verb ekpsuchō ‘literally ‘give out soul’ Act 5:5, 10, 12:23.

Cf. optasia – vision (Lk 24:23)

Cf. phantasma in two places - Mt 14:26 //Mk 6:49 /apparition – NWT, ALT, RV, etc.;
/x: spirit – KJV+, /xx: ghost – most, ASV, NKJV; [Idiomatically it is comparable to ‘ghost’
in English, but connotation is different and is of unbiblical pagan idea of ‘a dead soul’]

www.angelfire.com/space/thegospeltruth/trinity.html
• Why the Holy Spirit Can't Be a Separate 3rd Person
[See Trinitarian word ‘person’, a translation from Latin, is defined just as the way they
want to use to claim the Trinitarian formula. Why not simply call it ‘X’ rather than
‘Person’ to prove their flimsy foundation?]
• The Holy Spirit is not Another Person but God's Divine Nature
[not ‘= nature’, but power in act inherent to His Being’]
• The Risen Man Jesus is the Holy Spirit
[Yes, God (<Elohim) is spirit Jn 4:24 /a spirit; /a Sprit - NWT; /Spirit; /spirit; /what
spirit is/; /as spirit;]

65
 the HOLY GHOST (KJV) or the HOLY SPIRIT

what is it? who is it?

what does it do? - all the works of the holy spirit is the works of Elohim in spirt.

'spirit-filled' – spirit as gift from Elohim.

Whatever are the works of h.s. and the gifts of h.s. – these have nothing to with the so-called
personhood of the h.s., a non-biblical lingo of Trinitarians.

Is it a separate God from God the Father? and from God the Son? When the Spirit works, then
what is God the Father doing? God the Son? Each on their own thrones?

When a prayer rose up, is it Father, or Son, or Holy Ghost – in turn or all together gives their ear?
When worshipped, each of acclamation ‘holy, holy, holy’ is heard by each of the Trinity
threesome?

• ‘Elohim is spirit’ (Jn 4:24); [/x: Spirit – GNB, WNT; / x: ‘God is a Spirit’ – KJV,
ASV, NWT; /x: ~ is a spirite - Bishops;] – not a spirit, nor a spirit being. Not about
the substance or essence of God.]; =as spirit;
• Mashiah – “the Last Adam as a life-giving spirit (1Co 15:45);
• angels are called sprits (pneumata) (Heb 1:17);

The holy spirit is none other than the Spirit of Elohim – the creative power of God’s love in act for
creation and care. [e.g. ‘in God’s spirit’ Mt 12:28 // ‘in God’s finger’ Lk 11:20]. The phrase ‘the Spirit’
itself is often used metonymic for Elohim Himself; that is, Elohim Himself in act. The Trinitarian
mindset takes it as a person, the third person = God, and to stay dogmatic, and claims that such
common literary device of anthropomorphism and personification cannot and should not be applied to
their Holy Ghost, when most of the occurrences it cannot be seen any way to be a person – again, what
sort of person, and why to be a person – to be worshiped and to be prayed to – to sit on the throne of
the Holy Ghost next to the thrones of God the Father and God the Son!]

The Spirit is not a transcendental being of static metaphysical existence– not a thing, an idea, or a
person, a Person, the third Person of ‘Godhead’, or a Being which is like ‘God’. It is God’s breath,
God’s movement, God’s power radiating out and resonating the creation to His own frequency of
divine energy so to speak. The work of the Spirit is the work of Elohim in power – for creation and
care of creation (cf. atonement and redemption, salvation, and sanctification are concepts of a
secondary level). For this there is no need to fall back on the traditional non-biblical and unbiblical
Trinitarian formula. Elohim – Logos – Spirit in triune relationality is what the Scripture shows, not
Father-Son-Holy Ghost static hierarchical tri-unity of Father-Son-Holy Ghost. Elohim is not Father
before He Himself revealed in the Spirit through Yeshua Mashiah. There were no three ‘persons’ or
‘individual beings’ in the heavenly realm at the creation (Cf. Jn 1:1) as if each one is on a throne, one
in the middle, in the right (for ‘Mr. Son’), and (for ‘Mr. Holy Ghost’) on the left?]

God is the very God who acts and moves with flow and radiating out (cf. there is no
such thing as radiating or flowing IN.) This is the meaning of the expression ‘Elohim
is spirit’ in Jn 4:24 – not ‘a spirit’ (like a ghost?). Spirit is not a person, nor substance
it is made of. It is not a God who exists with its very transcendent existence is its
raison d'être. The holy spirit is spirit of Elohim, not God the Holy Ghost.]

66
Capitalization in IRENT: – ‘holy spirit’ ‘the holy spirit’ 'the spirit of the holiness' ‘the Spirit’. [See
a concordance word study on SPIRIT, HOLY SPIRIT, and GHOST.] As the Greek noun pneuma
is neuter and by itself has nothing to do with ‘being a person or not’, IRENT has it to take neuter
third person pronouns (it, its, itself) consistently throughout the New Testament. [Note: Many
English Bibles do, inconsistently in some places, have it as He, His, Him, Himself – not on the
grammatical and linguistic basis, but purely on the traditional Trinitarian doctrinal basis. This is
in addition to their practice of having it rendered as the Holy Spirit or (‘the Holy Ghost’), even
when this is anarthrous in GNT.

Be not mistaken about grammatically taking neuter pronouns. Such practice should not suggest
that ‘spirit’ is something like immaterial ('impersonal') Force or Energy. When the very holy spirit
that which proceeds from the Father is from Father Himself. When God’s action in love works on
the creation and puts it on resonance, it is God’s power itself. The Spirit is not a stative being, but
power in dynamic active expression of God Himself in love.

Often, we hear people claiming that ‘the Holy Spirit is God’ [sic], citing Act 5:3-4; Ps 139: -8;
1Co 2:10-11, along with 1Co 2:10; Eph 4:30; Rm 8:26-27; 1Co 12:7-11; Jn 14:16, 26; 15:26, by
misunderstanding in following Trinitarian mindset.1

Is the Holy Spirit God? No, but the holy spirit is as God. It is the Spirit of God. It is not in the
sense of ‘the God (=Elohim)’. “Elohim (= the God) is spirit” (Jn 4:24; not ‘a Spirit’ as in KJV).
• the holy spirit is simply the Spirit of God; the holy spirit is not God Himself.
• the holy spirit is that which stands for God Himself in action (literary ‘personification’).
It is that God as the Spirit in His act to reach out toward the creation.
Cf. the expression ‘God the Holy Spirit’ (or ‘God the Holy Ghost’ in KJV English) as appearing
in a Trinitarian formula misleads by suggesting it is a separate God-being or a separate ‘Person’
(whichever way the word ‘person’ is defined).

In IRENT the Greek phrase is rendered consistently throughout (uncapitalized): Spirit is

capitalized when the phrase is metonymic of Elohim Himself. It is uncapitalized when it is in the
generic sense of spirit, power, breath, etc., which is often referred in the text as something Elohim
gives out as gift to the believers. Such spirit is not given out by God the Son; it is not something
‘God the Holy Ghost’ coming down from heaven, etc. Extensive writings on the Holy Spirit (‘Mr.
Holy Ghost’ as if a person) in the Trinitarian articles on the themes such as the nature and the
works actually fail to prove how it is a person (or Person), whatever the meaning of ‘person’ they
might want to define. They ignore the common literary (undogmatic or un-doctrinal) device called
‘metonym’, ‘personification’ and ‘anthropomorphism’. Something related to God or God’s people
does not demand personhood.

(1) ‘holy spirit’ for the Greek anarthrous phrase. (Most English translations render erroneously
as ‘the Holy Spirit’ in wholesale manner.) It is spirit which is of God. The holy is in the sense
of ‘divine’ ‘sacred’ ‘God’s’ ‘belong to God’ ‘from God’; it is opposite of ‘unclean spirit’ which
is of Satan and from Satan. [for *satan, see WB#1]
(2) ‘the ~~ holy spirit’, in prepositional phrases with remote article.
(3) ‘the spirit of the holiness’ or 'the holy spirit' (not captilized as 'the holy Spirit' or 'the
Holy Spirit’), as mostly in nominative used as a grammatical agent of the sentence. It is God
Himself coming in will and action with power in love.

67
Holy, Holiness: [See under its heading ‘*holy; *sacred.]

The holy spirit – what is it?’ ‘who is it?’ –It is Spirit of the God (Elohim). The attribute ‘holiness’
belongs to God. It is often expressed simply as ‘the Spirit’, esp. in Acts, which is about the acts
of the holy spirit in the spread of the Gospel of the Mashiah (>the Messiah) for His Kingdom reign.
It carries the power and the will and the love of God Himself who has it radiate out, revealing His
name (i.e. Himself) in power in the action of creation and its care, that is, love-in-action. When
this Spirit reaches the spirit of man to make it resonate, man’s spirit is quickened into life from
God. Man experiences it as the effect of God’s power. On the part of God to proceed from, it is
God Himself in action and it is as a person; on the part of man to receive, it is the power of God,
as a gift = the spirit. If one is hooked on the idea of the Holy Spirit as a person (third person) of
God, they will utterly fail to comprehend all the occurrences of ‘SPIRIT’ and ‘HOLY SPIRIT’ in
the Scripture as to the true meaning and message – all because, in its basic sense, ‘holy spirit’ is
‘holy spirit’ is ‘holy spirit’, no matter how and where it occurs. The holy spirit is only what it is
when the context tells so.

The holy spirit’ is not a separate ‘person’ as such. With the English word ‘person’ as normally
used is not to be confused when the Trinitarians apply the term ‘person/Person’ to it.

In the linguistic and theological tradition, ‘God’ is a grammatically masculine noun, taking English
masculine gender pronoun (i.e. He, His, Him). Hence it is possible to use masculine pronouns for
HOLY SPIRIT when it is personified and functions as grammatical agent. However, no definite
instance is yet to be found in which it is necessary and essential. Noted again is that any honest
and accurate translation of the Scripture is not possible if based on theological and doctrinal agenda
(to serve sectarian and denominational needs), not purely from the linguistic and literary approach.

Personification does not imply or prove personhood [/x: ‘personality’ – psychological jargon].
‘God is a person’ itself is personification. God is NOT literally a person, nor a being. In relating
to us, God is as a person – comes to us as a person. He is not an ontological being (or person) that
simply exists. ‘The (ultimate) Being’ as the concept related to God idea is a Greek philosophy, in
which His existence is independent to any other. He cannot be other than supra-person, and supra-
being – the Ultimate Reality beyond realm of ‘being’ ‘existence’ ‘person’. When we say ‘God is
a person’, it cannot be other than in the syntax of ‘God is a person who ~~’. Yes, when we say He
is a person, it is only that He is as a person who relates to His created beings. That’s how we the
created being can ever approach Him – as a person, (not personal), not an abstract idea or being or
thing. Here we have to deal with logical and literary problem of what we mean by ‘is’ and what
we want to say by ‘is’. Anything can be anything, it is because of limitation of our linguistic
communication. By the same token, anything should not be anything, otherwise our
communication will break down completely.

68
The absence or presence of the definite article makes significant difference, not that the definite article
implies h.s. being God, but particularize in different nuance depending on the context.

In OT

New spirit - Ezk 11:19-20; 36:26-29

www.gotquestions.org/Spirit-Old-Testament.html

‘spirit’ – breath, wind, life (force). The word ‘spirit’ is equivalent to ‘breath’ or ‘wind’ in
Hebrew. [‘the Breath of God’ ‘the Spirit Wind’ – in E. Hays (1996), The Gospel of Gabriel]
[= that which sweeps over us and takes our breath away.]

The spirit of God is inseparable from His will, powera, life (force), and love. God’s will is of
what God is; God’s power is of what God is; God’s life force is of what God is. So is the Spirit
– God’s spirit is of what God is. The word ‘holy spirit’ is that which is holy, divine, that is, it
is the Spirit of God. All these are conceptually inseparable, since these are intrinsic to God
Himself with the Spirit to proceed from God towards the Creation. These are part and parcel
of God’s essence and nature – not a separate being, a separate ‘person’, whatever they mean
the word ‘person’b. The Spirit of Elohim = the holy spirit - God acting in His power on the
believers and the Messianic community through the person of the risen Mashiah; the same
power acted on the believers. Throughout the NT, “holy spirit is holy spirit is holy spirit” – the
Spirit of God Himself, no more, no less. It is that ‘God as the holy spirit’ – not another person,
nor impersonal force.

Translation of the arthrous phrase ‘to pneuma to hagion’ vs. anarthrous phrase ‘pneuma
hagion’ (Lk 1:35, 11:13, etc.) deserves careful attention – most translates indiscriminately by
inserting the definite article where it should not be and put the words in initial capital letter to
bring in alien unbiblical idea of ‘the Holy Spirit’ as a third person of Godhead. This point
cannot be emphasized enough. [See ‘trinity’ in Appendix of this file.]

e. g. ‘pneumatos hagious’ ‘en pneumatic hagiō’ – adverbial phrases.

In the arthrous phrase ‘the holy spirit’, the presence of a definite article particularizes the word
and has nothing to do with whether the entity is a person or a Person (the latter is a Trinitarian
theological jargon).

That is, ‘the holy spirit (here) is not the holy spirit (there) is not the holy spirit (elsewhere)’. It
is the context (local and wider) that determines its precise sense. Frequent in the Acts, ‘the
Spirit’ is a short hand for ‘the Spirit of Elohim’ = ‘the holy spirit’. As a grammatical agent
[/subject] of the sentence it is personified, e.g. ‘the Spirit says …’ Such *personification is a
common literary device as a figure-of-speech. Thus, the Spirit of God stands for the agent of
action, that is, none other than God Himself.

When the Spirit is taken as the third Person of Godhead in the Trinitarian fashion, it ignores
what ‘spirit’ means, and what ‘holy spirit’ vs. ‘the holy spirit’ means. H.S. as the giver is

a
‘power’ – ‘might’ + ‘authority’. Different sense from ‘power’ of a physic term, which is in turn
different from ‘energy’. Cf. Lk 1:35 – ‘holy spirit’ // ‘power of Elohim’]
b
See elsewhere on the word ‘person’ – how it became a theological jargon, having derived from
persona, which is Latin word for Greek theological and metaphysical terms hypostasis: (‘being’
‘existence’) and homoousios (‘of the same being’ with ousia ‘essence, being, substance, etc.)]
69
confused with h.s. as a gift. A typical example is: ‘Receiving of holy spirit’ in Jn 20:22 is
confused with ‘being immersed in holy spirit’ in Act 1:5, 8; “giving of the [promised gift of]
holy spirit’ in Act 2:4. All this is because of fundamentally faulty grasp of the meaning of
‘spirit’ and ‘holy spirit’, which is the result of unbiblical Trinitarian formula of three-person
Godhead.

An honest approach to the notion of ‘holy spirit’ which affects translation work requires
readers are free of a non-Scriptural idea of its being a person, or one of the three Persons, as
understood by the tri-theistic Trinitarian position. Any hint of illogicality should not be
removed from our thought and speech. That it is not a person does not mean it is something
like impersonal ‘power’ or ‘force’. Neither its grammatical (neuter) gender should affect how
we think on what it is. There are a few places a pronoun is taken for it. Most have it take a third
person pronoun of masculine gender if it is with God. E.g. KJV - a demonic unclean spirit is
taken as ‘he’ (Mk 1:26), while the Spirit of God is taken as ‘it’ (Jn 1:32)! For the work of
IRENT, it is only when it refers to God and the risen Mashiah the initial is put in capital letter,
as ‘Spirit’, as Spirit of God, Spirit of Yeshua Mashiah, etc. In the fixed phrase, it is as ‘holy
spirit’, not ‘Holy Spirit’, other than used perhaps to be printed as a title.

When it is arthrous as ‘the holy spirit’, it may be simply ‘holy spirit’ that which is specified in
the context in the sense of ‘the aforementioned holy spirit’, etc. However, often, it is God
Himself in action with power to be flowing out (‘proceed’, ‘emanate’) – e.g. Lk 12:12 ‘the
holy spirit shall teach you’.

On the other end, it is ‘holy spirit’ without the article when it is on the receiver (the one
resonates with the Spirit) as His gift. E.g. Lk 11:13 holy spirit is a gift of holy spirit; holy spirit
as His gift. To be non-capitalized and without the article. Cf. ‘the holy spirit’ when the phrase
is the grammatical agent of the sentence; (cf. ‘good things’ //Mt 7:11 – prob. wisdom and
guidance supplied in response to repeated requests – NET fn). This is correct way, keeping in
harmony with the Scriptural truths, to understand where ‘the holy spirit’ is seen in several
places as if personified, prominently as paraklētos in G-Jn (rendered as ‘the one to be called
to one’s side – Jn 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7) and also in such expression ‘blasphemy against the
holy spirit’ (‘the Holy Ghost’ - KJV Mt 12:31). Here, some takes these as proof texts to spot
what fits into their idea of personhood of the holy spirit, as a separate, independent, third
‘Person’. We should not mistake such a literary device as a theological device employed by
the writers of the Scriptures themselves which is in fact a convenient device to build up their
unscriptural doctrines of 'God the Holy Spirit'.

Since Greek word pneuma (spirit) is neuter, in a few places where it has to take a pronoun,
IRENT has it to take third person neuter pronouns of it, its, and itself. [1Pe 1:11; Jn 14:17;
26] [Cf. the subject (the spirit) is in ellipsis in Jn 1:32. Esp. in Jn 16:13-14, twice there are
neuter third person pronoun ‘that one’. In several places with the subject of verbs in ellipsis,
where a literary device of personification is employed, IRENT takes its antecedent as pneuma
(neut.), instead of paraklētos (masc.).]

[For a detailed concordance list, see Appendix on WORD STUDY on SPIRIT

and GHOST.]

70
The Holy Spirit - Theological issues:
[adopted from TOC in RC Sproul (1992), Essential Truths of the Christian Faith]:
Comments are placed under each. Some are based on personification. Why does it have to be
with a ‘person’?

• The Deity of ‘the Holy Spirit’

Q 1 – what is ‘deity’? a god, a god-being, or God? Perhaps it is meant
‘divinity of the H.S.?
Q 2 – deity which the H.S. has? deity which belongs to H.S? or ‘deity, that
is, H.S.’?

• The ‘personality’ of the Holy Spirit

In most religious writings the psychological term personality (cf. ‘personal
styles’) is in misuse where the appropriate term is ‘personhood’ (‘entity as
a person’).
What does constitute ‘being a person’? The word ‘person’ is a theological
jargon which is a translation of Latin, which is in turn a translation of Greek
terms, which has nothing to do with a common English word ‘person’.
Understanding the Spirit as a ‘person’ is the mortal chink in the armor of
Trinitarianism, as it is for ‘God’ as a person. God may be a person, when
it’s one of many gods. But Elohim (the God) the Scripture revealed is the
Ultimate Reality (uncountable noun), not a Being, nor a Person.
Theologians extrapolated anthropomorphism to the reality of God Himself
and, consequently, He is brought down to a human level – makes easier to
describe and state about Him – even to manipulate and peddle in the name
of religion.
• The Internal Testimony of the Holy Spirit
• The Illumination of the Holy Spirit
• The Baptism of the Holy Spirit
-- baptism by H.S., with H.S., or the Spirit ‘baptize a person’?
• The Holy Spirit as Comforter
-- inadequate translation of the Greek word. ‘Comforting’ those being hurt or
suffering?
• The Holy Spirit as Sanctifier

Power God = the holy spirit in our life: (the expressions can be easily put the Spirit as
personified, esp. with ‘he’ instead of ‘it’, as it is actually of masculine gender.)
(a) to sanctify; to empower and encourage us in trials and sufferings; to challenge the evil
power. transforms us daily into the likeness of Yeshua Mashiah and to witness for Him and
to bear fruits for life in Mashiah.
(b) breath life in the Scripture to lead us into all truth. opens our eyes to understand the
mysteries of God.
(c) make possible for us to pray.
(d) bring God’s assurance that we are God’s children and all things work together for our
good;

71
holy spirit – a gift of God
Gift vs. Giver; Treasure; Treasure (the Son)

What is called 'holy spirit' in the Scripture is spirit of Elohim, spirit from Elohim to reach the
created world. The holy spirit is the Spirit proceeding from Elohim. It is the treasure of/by/from
Elohim with the Son being the treasurer ("... The Greek fathers held that the holy spirit is the
treasure and the Son is the treasurer - the Son receives and manifests the Spirit' but he [sic] does
not cause its excrescence as such, since only the Father is the source or origin or cause of both the
Son and the Holy Spirit through ineffably different but united acts. [From Letham (2004), The
Holy Trinity, (p. 206)] – to check ‘God’ ‘Elohim’ ‘Elohim’ – ARJ.

Fixed idiomatic phrases: in spirit’ ‘as to spirit’

List of religious jargon: [notice capitalization and definite article and insertion of ‘Holy’ when
quoting the Biblical texts, to introduce personification and deification of the spirit.]
[pentecostalist’s penchant]
• ‘filling with the Spirit’;
• ‘filled with the Holy Spirit’ ‘full of the Holy Spirit’ vs. ‘filled with holy spirit’ (e.g.
Lk 1:15); ‘filled with the spirit of Elohim’ (e.g. Ex 35:31); ‘full of holy spirit’
(e.g. Act 11:24); 'fullness of the Spirit'
• ‘indwelling of the Holy Spirit’ (how can a person – third person of three-God –
indwell or fill a believer person);
• ‘slain in the Spirit’
• 'Spirit-filled life'
• 'abundance of the Spirit'

*spirit; *ghost; apparition

• Elohim is spirit – Jn 4:24; [/xxx: God is a spirit – KJV] = as spirit.
• a spirit – Act 23:8
• an apparition [S5326 phantasma (2x) – Mt 14:26; Mk 6:49]; [-NWT, Cass, DRB;
/xx: a ghost – ASV, NET, most; /x: a spirit – KJV]
• ‘ghost’ – (as a visible disembodied soul of a dead person) – the word does not
appear in the bible.

The word ‘spirit’ (in English) covers also ‘mind’ ‘mental attitude’ ‘thinking’. Likewise, Gk
pneuma, which overlaps its semantic field with what is translated as ‘soul’. [Cf. 2Tm 1:7 ‘a
spirit of shrinking back in fear (deilia ‘cowardice’) and of power and love ~’

‘ghost’ in OT
KJV renders as ‘ghost’ in OT (x 11)
Gen 25:8,17; 35:29; 49:33; Job 3:11; 10:18, 20; 13:19; 14:10; Jer 15:9; Lam
1:19;
At a quick glance, these appear in the idiom of ‘giving out spirit’ (= ‘expire’ ‘die)

72
 Cf. Isa 29:4 – H178 ob;
/spirit – NASB, HCSB, NET; /ghost - CJB, ESV trio, NIrV, GW, GNB, ERV, NLT,
MSG, JPS; /ghostlike – NIV trio; /voice shall be like that of ghost [produced by a
medium] – AMP; /voice shall be like a medium’s – NKJV; /witche – Bishops; /spirit of
diuniation – Geneva; /the python – DRB; /pythonis - Vulg; /a familiar spirit – KJV,
ASV, Rhm;

*evil spirit; unclean spirit; demon ≈ demon-spirit, demonic-spirit;

[See WB #1]

D. *God, *God Problem, *God confusion

Capitalize or not to capitalize? – when and why.

The word in common English usage is mostly capitalized as ‘God’. However, this
practice is without discriminating. E.g. OMG (o my god; my God). That it is shown
capitalized does not necessarily mean that it refers to the very God of the Bible. It may
refer to any god-being in different religions. In IRENT translation, uncapitalized word
‘god’ is limited to human beings as gods (Jn 10:34, 35; Act 7:40) or to pagan deities
(1Co 8:5; Gal 4:8; Act 14:11; 17:18; 19:26).

www.etymonline.com/word/god

See * Religion in the file <Walk through the Scripture #1 - Words, Words and Words>.

See below for <* Jesus as God>.

.
‫ אֱלהִים‬H430 elohim Gen 1:1
‫ ַאלָּה‬H426 elah Ezr 4:24
‫ אֵל‬H420 el Gen 14:18

https://hebrew4christians.com/Names_of_G-d/Eloha/eloha.html

Hebrew Names of God

Eloah and Eloah Constructs given in Tanakh

‫אלהים‬
Eloha – Mighty, powerful one

Introduction

The word Eloah is the singular (or dual) of Elohim and appears more than 70 times in the Tanakh,
primarily in more poetic passages. The root-meaning of the word is unknown. It is generally
thought that the same divine name is found in Arabic (Ilah as singular "a god", as opposed to Allah
meaning "the God" or "God") and in Aramaic (Elah), though note the term Allah is "borrowed" from
the original language. In the Tanakh, the singular form is used in six places for heathen deities (e.g.,

73
2 Chronicles 32:15; Daniel 11:37-8;), though in the majority of cases the name is used for the God
of Israel.

Note that the final Hey uses a Mappiq, and the syllable uses the furtive patach (e-lo-ah).

Eloah and Constructs

For each name in the list below, I provide the following information:
1. The Hebrew text for the name
2. The most common English transliteration (in italics)
3. A definition for the name, references to the Tanakh, and frequency information
4. Additional comments, if applicable.

God
Eloah. [basic form] H433
"God" (a singular form of Elohim) that appears over 70 times in the Tanakh.
References: ‫ אֱל֣ ֹוה‬Deut. 32:15; 2 Chr. 32:15; Neh. 9:17; Job 3:4, 23; 4:9; 5:17; 6:4, 8f; 9:13; 10:2;
11:5ff; 12:6; 15:8; 16:20f; 19:6, 21, 26; 21:9, 19; 22:12, 26; 27:3, 8, 10; 29:2, 4; 31:2, 6; 33:12, 26;
35:10; 37:15, 22; 39:17; 40:2; Ps. 18:32; 50:22; 114:7; 139:19; Prov. 30:5; Isa. 44:8; Dan. 11:37, 39;
Hab. 3:3.

Eloah. [basic form]

This is a (defective) spelling variant found in the Tanakh. Some think this form is dual whereas
Elohim is considered plural.

The God of Jacob

‫אֱל֣ ֹוּה‬
Eloah Ya'akov.
The God of Jacob. Psalm 114:7.

The God of forgiveness

‫א ֱ֨לֹוּה‬
Eloah Selichot.
The God of Forgiveness. Neh. 9:17.
Additional Information

Here is some additional Information about the Name Eloah (from the Theological Wordbook of the
Old Testament):
Eloah. God, god (ASV, RSV similar). The exact relationship between this name for God in Scripture
and El or Elohim is disputed and far from settled. It occurs in some of the oldest OT poetry (Deut
32:15, 17) and very frequently (forty-one times) in the debates between Job (an ancient believer) and
his friends. It appears therefore to be an ancient term for God which was later dropped for the most
part until the time of the exile and after, when there was great concern for a return to the more
ancient foundations. It is not frequently used outside Job. It occurs once in Isa, once in Prov, twice
in Hab, four times in the Ps, and then in the postexilic books: 2Chr, Neh, and Dan, a total of five
times.

Marvin H. Pope in his Book, El in the Ugaritic Texts, has noted that Eloah never has the article
although it is once determined by the suffix (Hab 1:11) and found once in the construct (Psa 114:7).
He further points out that it never occurs in combination with another divine name.

We shall first look at the usage outside Job. Three times it occurs in parallel to "rock" as a
descriptive term for God (Deut 32:15; Psa 18:31 [H 32]; Isa 44:8). Once it is found in a context in
which God is described as a shield to those who take refuge in him (Prov 30:5). Three times it is
used in a context of terror for sinners (Psa 50:22; Psa 114:7; Psa 139:19).

74
 This would suggest that the term conveyed to God's people comfort and assurance while conveying
fear to their enemies. The concepts of strength and might conveyed by the term are further seen in
the three successive verses of Daniel's vision about the great anti-god (Dan 11:37-39). Here the anti-
god's god (Eloah) seems to be "strength" itself. In Hab 1:11 the term is used similarly.

In Hab 3:3, the prophet speaks of Eloah coming from Teman. In Job, Teman is associated with one
of Job's three friends, Eliphaz (Job 4:1). Interestingly, the term Eloah, used for God, is
predominantly used in Job by Job and Eliphaz in their debating. Only in one context does Zophar
use the term (Job 11:5-7). Bildad never does. Of course, Elihu uses it, perhaps in imitation of the
former speakers (six times in chapters 33-37). God himself, in speaking to Job, uses the term twice:
once in a context of his providence and once in parallel to "the Almighty" (see our discussion on the
concept of might associated with the name).

This term for God was usually clearly used for Israel's God, the true God. This is evident from the
fact that the Levites in the postexilic period used the term in quoting the descriptive revelation of
God given in Exo 34:6-7, where the original revelation to Moses had used El and Yahweh (Neh
9:17).

The Hebrew word is quite similar to the Aramaic Elah, the usual name for God in Biblical Aramaic.
It has been suggested that the term has come, via Aramaic, from two elements: El and Ah (a
shortened form of Ahyeh, Exo 3:14, "I shall be," the designation of Yahweh in the first person;
Feigin, Samuel I., "The Origin of Eloh, 'God', in Hebrew," JNES 3: 259). This suggests the
possibility that originally two separate gods were involved and later combined. Such a suggestion
does not seem likely inasmuch as the term is in Scripture almost always used as a designation of the
true God.

It is probably akin to the term El. It was in use quite early, then, after a period of neglect among
God's people, the term was revived to a limited use perhaps through the contacts with Aramaic,
where a similar term was in constant use.

Source: The Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, by R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer Jr.,
Bruce K. Waltke, 1980.

Problem of 'God' – *God poblem and 'God' problem;

(1) 'God' vs. 'god'. 'a God', 'a god'a, 'the God'b, 'the god' c [See below for '* the God'
vs. 'God'
(2) 'God' problem - about 'what God is' - what God, which God, whose God.
(3) God problem - (problems about God); 'who God is'; the notion of 'God'.
(4) God's problem – metaphysical and theological – notion of 'evil' and 'sin'

'Elohim (the God) is spirit' (Jn 4:24) 'God is spirit' – NIV, ESV, NASB, HCSB, NET;
/x: God is Spirit – NKJV; /x: God is Spirit – GNB; /xxx: God is a Spirit – KJV; /xxx:
God is a Spirit – ASV, NWT, YLT; /God is a spirit – GW; /xxxx: the Spirit is God –
Aramaic PE;
Words, Words – God, deity, deity (of Father, of Jesus), god-being; 'divine being';
godhead, divinity, 'being', 'person', substance, essence, nature, morphē (Phi 2:6)

a
'a god' = one of gods [e.g. Jn 1:1c 'the Word was a god' – NWT;
b
'the God' = the very God = 'the Elohim' [ho theos]
c
'the god' as appears in 1Co 4:4 in almost all translations and commentaries! [‘Elohim for this world-order’
– IRENT]
75
 The common English word 'God' is 'a mighty one' in its basic sense. It is mostly frequently
used as a translation word in the Bible, the Hebrew word 'elohim' and the Greek 'theos'. It is
used as a title; it is not a name. It can be applied human beings in and out of the Scripture; or
even inanimate objects (in primitive religions).
“God is God”? “God is not God” – for these opionated statements (i.e. arguments) the word
‘God’ needs to be quotation marks, i.e. ‘God’ is not God. All depends on what is meant by
the word 'God'. Is God 'God'? When in reference to the biblical 'God', it is 'the God', whose
name is YHWH (Hebrew tetragrammaton). Does Christians believe this God? Believe
YHWH as their God, the God of Abraham-Isaac-Yaakob-Moses-David? Yes, the same God
but believe the very God Yeshua shows Him as Father. When 'Jesus' of Christian religion
became 'God', practically of a religion of 'God Jesus' ('Iesus Deus'), there comes a
conundrum of linguistic & literary issue at the bottom of theological issue. When 'Father'
(which itself is not defined) is 'God', and 'Son' (which itself is no were defined other than in
circular argument) is 'God' and so on, and here 'God' is not defined, there is something
illogical with the statement that there is only one 'God'. The name of 'the God' which the
Scripture shows is being put out of our daily language by the vast majority of people who
reads the Bible. That the God has a name itself is not much of significance for our life.
'OMG!'- nothing to do with whatever 'God' is. For those who say ‘Jesus is God’ or ‘the name
of their God is Jesus’, the word ‘God’ means a God-being, a deity – which is the belief of the
Constantine Church, contrary to the whole Bible.

Even in the books on 'God' as its subject the word is not defined well. Nor we rarely find the
Divine name mentioned on its pages. Even the phrase 'the God' is also used for their 'Jesus
Christ'. See below for <* Jesus as God>.
•

'There is God.' 'Believe God.' – what God? which God? whose God?
• 'one God'? – "even demons believe that (there is one God)" – Jam 2:19.
• 'Christian God' (God Christians believe) is not identical with God in the NT. There
are many different Christian Gods, God of Christianism (i.e. Greco-Roman
Christianity) – e.g. God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Ghost, Trinity God,
'God Jesus', God of Catholics, God of the Protestants, God of other different religious
denominations, sects, divisions, movements, churches.
• God whom Jewish people believe is /Jewish god' which does not mean same as 'God
of Judaism'. They usually refer the Elohim as 'Hashem' ['the Name'].
• God whom atheists believe is the very own self. God whom Muslims believe is called
'Allah'. a
• The God in NT is the very God whom Yeshua called 'Abba' (> 'Father')

In our everyday common English usage, the word 'God' (or 'god') has varied meanings and
used differently. This is not limited to the word 'God', but virtually any word. It is easy to
grasp this linguistic/literary aspect of the word when we encounter the seemingly simple
state 'A is A', we do not consciously mean in literally mathematical precise precision 'A = A'
of an /equative statement, but rather 'A is as A'. When we have a father for example, we can

a
'[There is] No god but God' cf. (‫ َل ِإ ٰله ِإ َّل ٱهلل‬lā ʾilāha ʾillā llāh) or 'No God but Allah' – the first half of
/Shahada Islamic Creed. Note: Allah is not the name, but simply means 'God'. Cf. 'no God but Allah'.
76
convert the statement 'I am a father' into 'I am as a father', the result of which is of different
focus, from equative of identity to adjectival qualitative. The same hold true with any other
word. It is especially useful to see the statement 'God is God'. This statement may suggest
God = God; however, depending on what is meant by the words, the opposite 'God is not
God' is equally true and non-contradictory. For this sort of analysis, it would be clearer if
we put the words in a quotation mark, e.g. 'God' or /God/. This would force the readers to
see the word is not as they think they are.

77
 (a) 'what God is' – What God? Which God? Whose God?
(b) 'god' - a person (e.g. Caesar) or a thing (e.g. Sun, Moon); /gnostic god
(b) 'who God is' – Biblical vs. theological.
• "God is God"
• "God is God?"
• "God is God"?

Notion of God – is entertained differently by different people – by those believing 'God'

(theists), even by atheists or those claim that God is dead. Buddhism does not entertain
notion of God (as a divine being).

'God'? 'Believe in God? What God? Which God? What does it mean by 'believe God'?
Believe in God? So then? What does it mean then by 'not believe God'? What difference
does it make? Whose God? Which God, of which religion, of which denomination? Note:
God in the Bible is a translation word; it's not a name; it is a title or entity. God in common
English usage is not same as the God in the Bible, which is not same as God by the Church.
For many, 'God' is little more than a God somewhere, even in the expression 'I believe in
God'.

The statement 'believe God', 'believe in God', or even 'God is dead' or 'there is no God', all
by itself is meaningless, unless the context tells unambiguously which God, what God, and
whose God they are talking about.
Cf. Someone wrote: "God" isn't in the Bible
(https://progressingspirit.com/2018/02/08/god-isnt-in-the-bible/). Yeah, the 'God' he
wanted to write out, probably not his own 'God'.
Cf. Within the text of Larry Hurtado, God in the New Testament Theology, the word
is always "God" with the word in quotation mark.

God of the Bible vs. God of religion vs. God of Church. The One to be worshiped?

Believe God? Believe in God? Have faith in God? 'Believe in Him' is to put trust on Him as
the Lord of Life – Master over the created world and humanity with His love.

God problem, that is, the problem of the word 'God' itself — logomachy [a dispute about or
concerning words] 'what God is' and 'what is meant by 'God' – linguistic literary approach
before going into the God problem of theological and religious issues ('theology') on 'who
God is'.
'a god' 'gods' – note: the indefinite article (English) not just says 'one/a' but denotes a
member of the class. [E.g. problem of NWT translation of Jn 1:1c 'and the Word was a
god' – this has two issues: one is the word 'god' uncapitalized. It is English convention
for a pagan god; another is that 'a' connotes one of many others (a member of the
class), which includes pagan gods. The overriding problem is the lack of the definite
article for 'God'. It is a common English convention in every day usage, including
translation of the Bible. It is simply a left-over of the Latin (Vulgate)a and even so,
Latin has no grammatical articles. With Latin, when they say 'God', the expression 'the

a
the only translation used by the Constantine Catholic Church, which prohibited lay persons to access to it,
until the vernacular translation appeared in German when Martin Luther translated (completed 1534).
78
 God' (in Greek) is no longer to be concerned. Same for 'a holy spirit' vs. 'the Holy
Spirit' – no difference; that may be why most English Bible has almost exclusively
'the Holy Spirit', whether Gk. text has the article or not.
'a God'; 'God' = 'God-being';
'God' – mostly ho theos ('the God') which is rendered as 'Elohim' in IRENT
throughout NT, but as 'God' in most English Bible translations which cannot be
distinguished from the anarthrous Gk.
'our God', 'the God of us' ' God of us'.
Thematically comparable to the notion of 'king':
King; a King; the King
the Prince is the son of King; he is 'King' as King, not 'a King', nor 'the King'.
To an unambiguous statement, "I believe God":
<Response 1.> – what is meant by 'God'? Not 'god'? A god? The God? What God?
Which God? Whose God?
Anything/anyone can be 'God'. Anyone can be 'worshiped' as 'God'. Does it make
'God'?
<Response 2.> – Is it 'I', is it 'believe', is it God, which is in focus or prominence? –
‘speech setting’; How is 'God' different from 'god'?
What is 'God'? and Who is God?
<Response 2.> –So? So then? So what? For what?
Linguistically and literarily speaking, the statement that "someone is God" cannot be other
than "someone is as God'. [For primitive religions, it is also true for a particular 'something',
i.e. 'something is as a god'; it is not 'something is a god'. E.g. sun god, moon god, etc.]

'God is God', 'God is God'?' 'God is God?' vs. 'God is not God'

<Response 1> – Why not? How so? So? So what? What then?
<Response 2> – No, God is not God. God is not 'God'. What God? Which God? Etc. The
'God' who was claimed to be dead is the 'God' of Nietzsche, a fake god unrelated to the God
of the Bible, whatever he really meant

'God', god, 'God-being'

Heb. 'el' – god, God;
'god' – uncapitalized for a pagan deity
God-being – 'a mighty one'; 'God' for a title or a label;
ělâhîn H420 'gods' – (Daniel 2:11, 47; 3:12, 18; 4:8, 18; 5:4, 11, 14, 23)
elohim H430 'gods' – Psa 82:6 [Cf. 'Elohim' w/ singular verb.]
'gods' – Jn 10:34 (← Psa 82:6), 35

79
 The word 'God'a is used a translation word for Hebrew Elohim (which takes singular verbs;
cf. 'elohim' when taking plural verb) and elb in OT. It corresponds to Gk. theos in NT. It is
not a name. The basic sense is a god-being or a deity – a mighty one. It can be applied to
anyone or anything, depending on how it is used. It is not necessarily the very 'God' of the
Bible but simply a deity as an objection of worship by human being. In the English Bible
the word 'God' is often used as a title (appellation).

It is capitalized in English to differentiate from 'god' which is used for a human being or a
pagan deity. Capitalizing itself does not make help as it is not for spoken English. Only the
context tells what is meant and referred to. When it is used as a generic term, as used outside
the Bible, it is not capable of to tell what God is or who God is meant. Even the same
speaker may mean God differently on different times as the word itself may be used in the
different context.

It occurs mostly as the arthrous noun ho theos ('the God'). It is rendered as 'God' in most
English bible translations, as it is an English convention to use no definite article with 'God'.
This practice does give rise to confusion, contradiction and contentions in different theology
and doctrine. c This ‘God problem’ is the linguistic problem of the word 'God', not the
theological/philosophical God problem –– what God is and who God is.

In this line, it is not incorrect to say <Everyone believes 'God'> whether it is God who is
dead (for Friedrich Nietzsche 1882)d or God who does not exist (for atheists). Whenever
and wherever we say or hear the word God, it is not clear what God, which God, and whose
God.e

Using a rhetorical question 'Does God exist?' 'where is God?'f Here we are dealing with
not with 'the God' (Elohim), but about 'a God' as what we mean by 'God' is usually not in
mind. The last question is equally pertinent to atheistsg; they have to know what God is so
that they can refute it. A similar problem exists with 'the Lord'.h

a Different languages and societies come up with their own word (sometimes more than one word and occasionally
in competition because of different sense and significance as well as word history). An agnostic position on ‘God’
may be understood in this line, if we put the lack of faith in God itself aside. In Korean – 하나님, 하느님, 신 (神).
The word 'allah' as a translation word in Arabic Bible?
b [Cf. three words, el, elohim, and YHWH, occur in Jos 22:22a]
c The most significant example is Jn 1:1b (ho theos) & 1:1c (theos). Both as 'God' in most Bible translations. Cf. 'God'

and 'a god' in NWT. NEB has 'God' and 'what God was'. IRENT renders the arthrous theos as 'Elohim' throughout.
d www.age-of-the-sage.org/philosophy/friedrich_nietzsche_quotes.html [Note: The God who is dead is his own God.]

Reading material https://bigthink.com/scotty-hendricks/what-nietzsche-really-meant-by-god-is-dead

e
E.g. God of Catholics, Protestants, Messianic Jews, Jews, Muslims, Mormons, and others – hardly same
God.
f
Cf. 'God is everywhere' 'God is in power, in charge, but not in control', etc.
g
"Where is God?" … Is it a good question? Is it a rhetoric? But, the answer (or response) come up first
should be what God? Or which God; and then whose God (yours? Of church? Of some religion?
Cf. Mikhail Bakunin: "If God really existed, it would be necessary to abolish Him" in response to Voltaire's
aphorism: "If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent Him."
h
Cf. 'There is one God, the Father, … and one Lord Yeshua Mashiah' [1Co 8:6] – This verse is simply
brushed aside by the Trinitarians as they believe their three-in-one Trinity God with 'God the Son' = 'God
Jesus' with 'Jesus' being the name of their God (= god) and their favorite 'God the Holy Ghost'.]
80
 [See also in Essentials of Vocabulary for Reading IRENT]

God: Problem with the English word 'God' – ‘God problem’ ‘God confusion)

The basic meaning of Greek word 'theos' is a deity, a god-being. Only the arthrous noun
ho theos ('the God')a can refer to the true, the only God of the Bible.b

In English, anyone or anything may be called 'god' in the sense of ‘mighty one’. Note that
capitalization is appropriate only when it is used in reference to the one only god. In written
English usage, however, the capitalized word 'God' is often used in reference to a god-like
being, human, thing, even a pagan god or a personally concocted god, while most English
Bible translations the same is, in most cases, in reference to the Creator. Only in the context
we can see that the word ‘God’ means 'the God' which refers to the true God (Elohim) of
the Scripture. Someone/something is labeled/called/designated as 'God', does not have
much meaning as it is a notion, not identity. This is easily seen in the common usage in
English language (i.e. 'O my god', 'God willing', etc.). That is, it is a generic god/God.
Hence, the statements such as 'we believe God', 'God is dead', 'afraid of God' etc. lacks
what the very statements are meant for. To such statements, the only sensible response is
'what God?' 'What is 'God'?', 'Then?' 'So then?', etc.

Unnecessary confusion within a religion or between religions is that the word ‘God’ itself
is not of same sense and not of same usage. Even when we utter it, the sense may not be
same. God of someone or some religion and God of others cannot be same all with different
image, definition, identification, and characterization. In the Bibles, this is one of the most
common words. We should know that ‘God’ is simply a translation word used and
inevitably and necessarily brings non-biblical ideas and meanings along with it, peculiar
to the indigenous socio-cultural setting (religious, philosophical, linguistic heritage. It is a
generic word and a name. Only the context tells what is referred; capitalization is does not
help since the pronunciation is same.

a
Cf. uncapitalized 'god' in English translation of NT should be used only for pagan deities or god notion.
b
'the God' = the Almighty Creator, 'YHWH Elohim' (/x: the LORD God. e.g. Gen 3:8; 2Ch 6:41) or 'Adonai
YHWH' (e.g. Exo 23:17; Jdg 16:28; Amos 6:8) = Elohim (= 'the God') of Yeshua. He is the Creator, the
Revealer, the Restorer (restore the original image of the created).
81
 ‘God’ vs. ‘the God’ - *rendering of Gk. theos and ho theos:

(1) The arthrous ho theos (‘the God’) is rendered as ‘Elohim’ (without definite
article) consistently throughout NT (such as my/your/our Elohim, YHWH
Elohim, Elohim our Father, Elohim the Most-High, Elohim the Almighty, Elohim
our Savior, etc.). What this Greek refers to is depending on the context and the
intention of the speaker. A problem case is in Jn 20:18 ‘Elohim of mine’ is no
other than Father of Yeshua (as 20:17; also 17:3; 14:20), not Yeshua himself with
a newly concocted title for Yeshua.] [Cf. *Remote definite article a]
(2) The anarthrous theos (‘God’) as 'God' in most cases (aside from non-
biblical or pagan god entity 'a god') (as in 1Co 8:4) with some exceptions
as:
• ‘what God isb (e.g. Jn 1:1cc, 1:18; 1Jn 4:12; 2Jn 9) when it is in contrast to
'who God is' (← ho theos 'the God')
• of the notion of god-being (person or non-person), or god-principle (non-
person).
• In compound words, e.g. ‘God-fearing’, etc. When used in pagan notion, it is
uncapitalized as is the case of plural ‘gods’.
• Vocative thee (2x in Mt 27:46) 'Thee mou' 'O my God!'
• phrases with genitive – consistently as <God’s>, e.g. ‘God’s curse’, ‘to God’s
way’, ‘God’s law’, 'God's son', etc. [a few exceptions – Mk 11:22 ‘faith in
God’; Rm 10:2 (‘godly zeal for God’)] [Cf. ‘God’s love’ vs. ‘love of God’ –
See on Greek grammar: subjective genitive vs. objective genitive; genitive of
source, etc. in the file <Walk through the Scripture #1 - Words, Words and
Words>.]
Standing on the linguistic and literary basis, such a God problem is completely bypassed when we
borrow the very Hebrew word as a translation word to be used in place of ‘God’ in the Bible. This
makes it possible to let the Biblical text come clearer, without being affected by theological and
doctrinal contentious issues among the various Christian religions, beliefs, and churches.
‘a god’ – this gives a word picture of ‘one of many gods’, including pagan and false gods.
‘god’; ‘gods’ – (god-being) –of human beings, mythological gods, pagan gods, anything
demanding ‘worship’
‘one god’
‘God’ – it is not distinguishable from ‘god’ when used in speech; even in written, it begs a
question such as ‘what God’ ‘which God’ and ‘whose God’. Often not the reality of who
God is, but simply a notion of God-being. The word ‘God’ is not a name; it may be used
for a title for any divine being, including human. That someone is God or called God does
not thing more than a simple description and does not point to whom it is referred.
• 'God' (for ‘the God’) → 'Elohim'
• ‘the god’ → 'Elohim' [almost all English bible translations wrongly
translate only once in 2Co 4:4 this way (uncapitalized); some (Gaus)
even adds ‘Satan’ in the text!]
• ‘the only God’ → 'the only Elohim' [Jn 5:44] ['remote article']

a *Remote definite article: the definite article and its noun are separated by an interposed phrase.
E.g. (1) 'Elohim our Deliverer' ('God our Savior') - tou sōtēros hēmōn theou (in genitive) (4x) Tit 1:3; 2:10; 3:4; 1Ti 2:3;
(2) Tit 2:13 'the great Elohim. Jud 1:25 '(v. 24) tō ~~ monō theō'; Ti 1:17 "Tō ~~ monō [sophō] Theō"; (3) "Elohim of
Abraham and Elohim of Isaac and Elohim of Yaakob" //Lk 20:37 //Mark 12:26 v.l. [Cf. //Mt 22:32
b The syntax is similar to Jn 4:24 (‘as spirit’ or ‘what spirit is’) and to 1Jn 4:8 (‘Love’ vs. ‘what Love is’).
c Cf. ‘what God was (Jn 1:1c, NEB, REB; /xx: a god - NWT.

82
 For many, 'God' is little more than a God somewhere, even in the expression 'I believe
in God' and even in the mind of atheists. 'God' is used in common English in various
ways, be it of religion, philosophy, or anthropology.

The word as used as a translation word in the bible is also in different senses,
which the Bible clearly distinguishes in Greek by mean of a grammatical
definite article. The word 'God' occurs mostly is ho theos ('the God') in Greek,
while theos ('God') is less frequent, often in genitive case. a

Our English convention of not using definite articles for some words does not
help distinguish between two. It actually causes unnecessary theological and
doctrinal arguments on 'deity' and 'divinity' of a person other than the very God
the Almighty. b

The word is rendered in the Bible as 'God' or 'god'; however, such an English
capitalization scheme of <God> vs. <god> is of no help, since they are not
distinguished at all in the spoken English. It does not help remove difficulty in
dealing with the problem of God issue and the problem of 'God'.

• anarthrous theos – 'What God is'

• arthrous ho theos – 'Who God is'
IRENT translation:
• renders ho theos as 'Elohim'. Most renders as 'God'. c.

Since the Hebrew word itself when written as elohim (uncapitalized) denotes
'gods', Gk. ho theos corresponds to the Elohim. However, since the aim of
IRENT is simply to remove mixing up of arthrous and anarthrous theos by
wholesale rending by most bible translations as 'God', it is found not necessary to
keep the English definite article for the word 'Elohim'. The English diction with
'Elohim' within the text is same as 'God' (not 'the God') in the most bible
translations. – following the translation principle of IRENT based on the
linguistic and literary approach.

• renders theos as 'God' or 'what God is 'when the referent is YHWH Elohim;
or 'God-being', 'a god'd. Most renders as 'God'e

a
Note: Anarthrous genitive theou ('of God') is akin to 'divine'.
b
Any other 'God' or 'god' is created by man or by gods themselves who are created by man's mind. They are not
just pagan or mythological gods. They include anyone who is called and given the title 'God' and are to be worshiped.
i.e. Caesars for the Romans or Mormon God and gods; even 'God the Son' 'God the Holy Ghost' 'God Jesus'.
c
We find a few Bible translations which renders as 'the God' or 'The God'. In one particular place all
Bible translations have it wrongly as 'the god' (uncapitalized) - 2Co 4:4; the God is thus demoted to the
god, which is from their eisegesis to mean it as the Satan.
d Mostly rendered as 'God'. A contentious example is Jn 1:1c 'and the Word was a god' (NWT).
e
Cf. Jn 1:1c 'the Word was God' – most; /'the Word was a god' – NWT; /'what God is, the Word was' –
IRENT; /'what God was, the Word was' (in NEB);
83
 In IRENT ho theos ('the God') which the Scripture refers to the Creator YHWH Elohim
is rendered as Elohim (borrowing from Hebrew) a , not as ‘God’ as in most Bible
translations. b This is one of a few that makes IRENT distinguished from most other
English translations. This translation principle is to achieve the goal of translation in a
solely linguistic and literary approach, without any agenda or need which is inherent in
various denominational positions.c

It offers quite a number of advantages for the readers of the Bible:

(1) It dispels any image formed by the word which is usually used in the sense of
generic Godd without specific reference to the God of the Scripture;
(2) It removes any confusions, conflicts, and contentions over the word God when
it is used in Christian religions by putting on Jesus (as God in Trinitarian mindset);e
(3) It makes impossible to use the word as an expletive in our English speech; (4)
It offers a clean and uncomplicated solution to help distinguish the two for
translation and interpretation purpose, without being partial to different doctrinal
and theological positions.
(5) There is no need for struggle to find what and whom the English word ‘God’
signifies in the translated text.
….

Majority of Gk. 'theos' appears as arthrous. Throughout in IRENT the arthrous phrase ho
theos ('the God') is consistently rendered as 'Elohim' as it is always in reference to the
God, Father of Yeshua. It is in a sharp contrast to most English Bible translations, which
simply follow English convention of having no definite article for 'God'. On the other
hand, the word 'God' is reserved for translating only the anarthrous theos which may be
rendered also as 'God-being', 'a god', etc. It is so without exception; with a few places
where the finite article in English is retained, e.g. 'the very Elohim' (Lk 18:19).
A particular example is in 2Co 4:4 ho theos tou aiōnos toutou ('Elohim as in this age') with
'Elohim' for 'the God' throughout in IRENT. Most translates this Gk. phrase as 'the god of this
world' which makes the God as equivalent to 'Satan' by a clever typographic capitalization trick.
[https://youtu.be/0lu_-JyhAtw <The GOD of the age is who??> Here, the genitive case should
be carefully read in order to avoid to read it as 'belonging to this world', as it is suggested
by the common translation 'of this world'. It should be in the sense of 'Elohim as in this
age' – 'confronting this age' etc.] [Compare 'Elohim (the God) in 2Th 2:11.]
Another notable example: Phi 3:9 '… their Elohim is [replaced by] the belly'; most Bible
translations have it as 'their god'.
The phrase '*my Elohim' is with the arthrous noun, ho theos mou, i.e. 'the God of me'.
This includes Jn 20:28 'my Master and my Elohim' (xxx: 'my Lord and my god' – REB)
(here 'Elohim' of Thomas is Elohim of Yeshua). This phrase is often mistaken simply as
''my Lord and God', in the idea they entertain, i.e. 'Jesus is God'; the name of their God is
'Jesus', in short, Jesus is made into the Trinitarian 'God Jesus' ('Iesus Deus'). They distort

a Elohim’, a Hebrew word, is used in translation only in a small number of English bibles. The Hebrew word elohim
in OT is in a few places also used to refer to human persons, angels, etc., esp. as a plural noun. [≈ ‘gods’ in Jn
10:35] www.revelations.org.za/Elohim.htm (Elohim vs God)
b Rendering it as ‘the God’ as a few bible translations do, may be precise, unambiguous, and grammatically

accurate. However, the problem is that this is against a common English convention and diction.
c E.g. Sacred Name Movement, Hebrew Roots Movement, Jehovah's Witnesses, etc.
d
– everyone and every religion believe 'God' and believe in God, but nowhere clear-cut and self-
evident as to what such God is, which God over others, or who God is;
e
E.g. Jn 1:1; Jn 20:28; Heb 1:8, etc.
84
 and misinterpret it by claiming that Thomas was declaring (in their eisegesis) that Jesus
was 'God' that which is in addition to God the Father. Some fancifully think 'God' here is
in the sense of a supernatural spiritual being different from God the Father.

However, the expression 'my Elohim' in Jn 20:28 is exactly like Jn 20:17 "to the Father
of me, yes, Father of yoů all — yes, going to Him who is my Elohim and yoůr Elohim"
(pros ton patera mou kai patera humōn kai theon mou kai theon humōn).

Anyone or anything can be 'worshiped', even as 'God'. That someone/something is worshiped does
not mean he/she/it is 'God'. We need clear definition of 'God' and 'to worship' to make any sense
out of arguments. What God is and Who God is – to be revealed in and by the Scripture, not from
man's philosophy and theology.

Everyone has different ideas on God. To say, ‘I believe God’ would not be saying much. we often
simply do not have a clear definition of it when the word is uses. It is remarkable that we can
communicate so well with encountering much conflict even without having clear meaning of words
in our mind. Every word in a dictionary has meanings listed. However, a lexical meaning cannot
be absolute; meanings can be only from how the word is being used in the living language.

"What's in a word?" What does a word really mean? Sure, we use the same words on a daily basis
to communicate our thoughts, desires and wishes, but are we truly communicating what we think
we are? This book looks at words and how individuals define each of those words based on their
own experiences and understandings of the world around them.

The word 'God': God is not a name, but a word used often as a title. God in common usage in
English is not same as God in the Bible, which is a mere translation word. What God refers to is
entirely depending on the context. The title God can be put on anyone and anything; the meaning
is also depending on the text. Capitalization does not make it a name. Caesar was a god/God to
Romans. 'Jesus' is God to those who believe 'God Jesus' ('Iesus Deus').

For NT, it is a translation word for Gk. theos (god, God) (which appears mostly as ho theos 'the
God', though the article is usually dropped unless it is followed by a modifying phrase or clause. It
is a translation word in OT for Heb. elohim (less frequently ela or eloha) with the meaning of
'mighty one(s)'. [Cf. Isa 9:6 El gibbor, 'a mighty El' – not 'El Shaddai' (> 'God Almighty') Gen 17:1]

The God problem is caused by the Trinitarianism/Binitarianism which has even altered the notion
of 'God', when they formulate 'God Jesus' Christology by claim that 'Jesus is God' and 'Trinity God'
with proof-texting – in place of the only God, YHWH Elohim, to worship for monaltry (>
monotheism) inherent in OT and Judaism. For sure, it is a step advanced than an angel Christology.

a
'el' - EliYah, Elisha, Eliezer, Ezekiel, Daniel, Yoel; Michael (meaning “Who Is Like El”), Gabriel
(“El Is Powerful”). Bethel (meaning “House of El”), El-Beth-el (“El of the House of El”) El-eloah-
Israel (“El, Elohim of Israel) – Gen 28:19. Immanuel – Mt 1:23 ('El is with us'). Mt 27:46 Eli, Eli
(My El, my El). https://yrm.org/elohim-proper-pagan/
85
 The word 'God' – what God is. /God/ - notation with slashes / / for the word itself,
spoken, heard, read or written as in English usage.
Vs.
'the God' – the God of Being – who God is. The God-being – as 'the Absolute' AND
'the Being of Person'.a
one among many gods, including pagan gods
a god
a God = a God-being
What does capitalization give which is
God ineffective in spoken English?
Specific reference depends on the context.
Without further modifier (e.g. with 'who-
the God clause) it refers to the God in the Scripture.
IRENT renders as 'Elohim'.

[partitive – some of; not all – i.e. 'the Jews' in the Gospel text]
'Countable nouns' – any noun can be seen as countable. Matter of fact, all and every that
which is represented by a word is countable. When call a 'countable noun' we are simply
treating to as countable. that which in its common usage is uncountable, e.g. 'water' as a
substance. Water is a non-countable noun? No, it is just treated as non-countable. Cf.
'waters' – here /water/ is as countable., but the meaning is different and is in the sense of
a body of water (e.g. a lake, a pool).

/God/ as a noun is countable, that is, is used as countable. But 'God' in the Bible, that is,
'the God' (ho theos) is singular but not countable. We do not believe in a God, but in the
God. That which we believe in is 'the God', not 'God'. [Cf. Jn 1:1b vs. 1:1c] On the other
hand, the true God in the Scripture cannot be countable. Otherwise, 'he' be just one of
many. This linguistic and literary issue - also applied to /Jesus/. [The figure of] 'Jesus'
presented by the Church is not same as [that of] human person presented in the New
Testament text. First of all, he was and never is /Jesus/, but Yeshua.

The name: A common expression in the writings by biblical scholars and writers, ‘God has
many names’b the word ‘name’ does not really mean ‘name’ but epithet or title. Elohim of the
Scripture (God of the Bible) has only one name, the name which He himself revealed, that is,
YHWH.
" … The obvious purpose of a name is to distinguish one individual from another. That
should go without saying, yet how many think about that simple fact when it comes to
their Heavenly Father? They have been taught to call Him by a generic label, which He
Himself says is unacceptable. It is amazing that all religions are known by the name of
the one worshiped … except Christianity …" (from https://yrm.org/your-fathers-name/
- a copy in <Supplement Collection>.)

a
https://subsplash.com/aletheia/media/mi/+adbc254 <3. God – What is God like?> - God is
'Personal' 'Absolute' 'Being'.
b
‘God has many names’ – Google search shows almost a half million hits. There are quite a number of books
written on the theme. What is seen in a book by John Hick (1982), God has many names, is the God (=Elohim),
mistaken having many names, is to be replaced by a nameless God [s.v.] of religious pluralism. Note the term
‘name’ [of a person] is often not discriminated from ‘titles’ or ‘descriptors’ of that person, including of ‘God’.
86
The phrase 'YHWH Elohim' is actually 'YHWH as Elohim', e.g. YHWH our Elohim. Likewise,
'Yeshua Mashiah' (Gk. Iēsous Christos) is 'Yeshua as Mashiah' [within the Gospels; ‘Yeshua the
Mashiah’ outside the Gospels]; not "Jesus = Christ" with 'Christ' as another name (last name in
English naming convention) of his.

Another important observation: Circular reasoning is common in doctrinal statements. A word is

introduced without a clear definition and it is explained by the same word, which is used not in
the same sense, the fact of which is hidden. E.g. use of the word 'God' in the Trinitarian doctrine
– how many Gods to explain the Trinity Goda}

The expression 'one true God' does not appear in the Bible. That there is only one God for the
believers means only one God to worship. 'The God' (ho theos – i.e. Elohim) is the First Cause,
the Almighty Creator (Monolatry, which is not same as Monotheism) .

[copy image to Appendix – in G-Mk ((Mk 12.29 'YHWH alone vs. one'))]

The word 'God' is a common non-specific word in general use with many senses. It is
not a name, nor a title. It is simply a referent word to any God-being. Only when it is
put together with the definite article, as 'the God', it can refer specifically to the God of
the Scripture, the Almighty, the Most-High, the Creator (of Genesis 1 – 2).
Capitalization in the written form is of a convenient tool, but itself does not provide
specification; not does it work when the word is spoken.

As anyone or even anything can be 'God' or 'god'. What matters is in what sense
'god/God' is used, by whom and in what setting; also, in what sense we say someone
IS God/god. E.g. Isa 9:5-6 [6-7] – Who was the one called 'Wonderful Adviser',
'Mighty God', 'Everlasting Father'. King Hezekiah? Or a future Messianic figure?

The name of our God is Jesus', the Trinitarians say. However, Yeshua of the Gospels
was never called 'God', never He was and never He himself claimed to be. He was
called the son of Elohim (> the Son of the God >> the son of God) and became
believed so. [Mt 3:17; Mk 1:11; 9:7; Lk 9:35].

By the way of analogy, King is all the power and authority. However, whatever the
King does and can do, it can be done by the Prince to carry out the will of the King.
The prince is not the King, but he is 'King', or in a more precise language, he is as
King. The Son of the King does as King and can do anything what the King does and
can because he is 'King', not he is the King. Unlike a human son of a king, the notion
of 'son of Elohim', a figurative Hebrew idiom, means 'someone as son of Elohim', since
God cannot have son in biological-social sense. The idea of being adopted is only for
the case of human family.b

a
Instead of 'one God' of the Bible, Trinitarian mindset has 'Trinity God' – '*Triune God' – 'Three-person God'
– Three-headed god – three-faced god (esp. icons of Orthodox Church). Each person called Father, Son, Holy
Ghost is God, but they deny 'three Gods' with their advanced math of <1+1+1 = 1 x 1 x 1 = 1, not 3>. Note
that no definitions of the terms – God, person, Father, Son, Holy Ghost, one, divine, divinity – are found in
the Trinitarian doctrine statement.
b
That the believers are 'sons of God' means they are [regarded] as sons (e.g. Gal 3:26 huioi theou)]
87
 The son of Elohim does and can do anything and everything Elohim does in following
the will of Father – including 'forgiving sins (against God)' [Lk 5:21, 24; //Mk 2:7, 10;
//Mt 9:6) – Yeshua was forgiving sins which Elohim alone can, not because he was
'God', but he does and can as God, because he was the son of Elohim (not as unbiblical
'God the Son'); he receives all the authority and power from his heavenly Father, not
his own from his being 'God' — 'all the fullness of God-being from Elohim' (Eph 3:19;
also Col 1:19; cf. Col 2:9 (all the fullness of the deity); this is in his divines (divine
nature); not because of his divinity or being deity or God.

God galore in the Trinitarian lingo, how many Gods can be counted here?
#1A. Believe there is only One God. (But does the Bible say so?) [Even demon believes
#1B. Triune God (God the Triune Being)
#1C. God the divine nature
#1D. God who became 'man' (or 'god-man' or 'demigod') (God Incarnate)
#2A. Father is God; #2B Son is God; #3C the Holy Spirit (or the Holy Ghost) is God –
they deny that this says three Gods. Is one of these same as #1?
#2B. God the Holy Spirit (or ‘God the Holy Ghost’)
#3. The Son of God – here 'God' must be #2A.
#4. He is God of God – 2 more Gods here; which one is which? What does it mean? 'He
is the true God, the real God, God among Gods, or God over other Gods? How is it
different from 'God of gods' (Deu 10:17)?
#5. God the Son – which God? What God?
#6. God Jesus ('Iesus Deus') – 'Jesus' became 'God' or Jesus was made God. [Cf. 'Jesus is
God' vs. 'Jesus as God', i.e. 'Jesus as a God-being'] [Three phases of God Jesus: (1) 'Pre-
existing Jesus' before his virgin birth of Church myth was God (i.e. God the Son) (Cf.
Archangel Michael = Jesus according Angel Christology of the Jehovah's Witnesses), (2)
Jesus the man (from birth to death) but acted like God; and (3) God Jesus after
resurrection.

Cf. www.angelfire.com/space/thegospeltruth/TTD/topics/godgodgodgodgod.html
God question is not just about God, but much more importantly is about Yeshua as 'Jesus
Question'.

*God Jesus ('Iesus Deus'): a Trinitarian God – fully developed 'Chalcedonian Christ' of
'fully man and fully god' with the words capitalized, of course. Phi 2:6-7 & Col 1:15-17
serve as the bulwark of Trinitarian theology.

88
*Hebrew words: Elohim and *Adonai –
'Elohim' and 'Adonai', two most important Hebrew words, used as translation words in
IRENT, corresponding to 'God' and 'Lord' in the most Bible translations.

The English word ‘God’ in the NT is nothing more than translation of the Greek ‘theos’,
which is by and large a translation of Hebrew word ‘Elohim’. in small number of places
as the context dictates, it is rendered as 'God' (esp. as genitive God's), 'God-being', 'god',
etc.

English words keep on changing, a vocabulary of religious as well as biblical jargon

comes and distorts meaning of the translated text. Never trust the translation; no
translation can claim be to accurate. All we can accept is that a given translation treats
somethings more accurate than in other translations. Of course, we have to deal with a
perennial problem, the problem of defining the word ‘accurate’ itself. The common word
'God', even capitalized, does not necessarily refer to God the Almighty in the Bible.

Anarthrous kurios in reference to Elohim is rendered as 'YHWH' or 'Adonai' in order to

distinguish from the titles Yeshua: 'Master' for Yeshua in the Gospels and 'Lord' for the
risen and exalted Yeshua.

• *elohim H430 – plural form, either as 'God' (taking singular verb; i.e. YHWH Elohim; not so-
called 'Triune God'), or 'gods' (people or pagan gods);
• *el H410 – singular – God or god. (Cf. Elohe Amos 5:27) gibbor [H1368 'strong' 'mighty'];
shadday [H7706 Almighty]
El-gibbor– the powerful God > mighty God (Isa 9:6);
El-shaddai– God the Almighty (Gen 17:1)
• Cf. YHWH Sabaoth (LXX kurios sabaōth) (1Sam 1:3, 11; 4:4; 15:2; 2Sam 5:10, 6:2,
18; 7:8, 26, 27; 1King 18:15; 19:10, 14; 2Kg 3:14; 1Ch 11:9, 17, 24; Jer 11:20; Psa
24:10; 46:11; 84:1, 3, 12; Isa 2:12; 5:7, 9, 16, 24; 6:3, 5; 8:18, 18) [Cf. Jos 5:15 the
host of YHWH's]
• Elohim of hosts Psa 59:5; 69:6; 80:7, 19;
• YHWH Elohim of hosts Psa 80:4; 84:8; 89:9; Isa 3:1, 15; Jer 2:19;
[many more in Isa & Jer]
• 'All the host of heaven' (1Kg 22:19; 2Kg 7:16; 21:3, 5; 23:4, 5; 2Ch 18:18; 2Ch 33:3,
5); 'the host of heaven' (Neh 9:6)

(Tzevaot H6635 of hosts, armies /angel armies – cf. heavenly hosts – Lk 2:13) shall
accomplish this. http://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/7907-host-of-heaven
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavenly_host#cite_note-4
In the Hebrew Bible, the name Yahweh and the title Elohim frequently occur with the word tzevaot
or *sabaoth ("hosts" or "armies", Hebrew: ‫ )צבאות‬as YHWH Elohe Tzevaot ("YHWH God of Hosts"
Amos 6:8; Hosea 12:5), Elohe Tzevaot ("God of Hosts"), Elohim Tzevaot (Psa 80:19); Adonai
YHWH Tzevaot ("Lord YHWH of Hosts") or, most frequently, YHWH Tzevaot ("YHWH of Hosts").
This name is traditionally transliterated in Latin as Sabaoth, a form that will be more familiar to many
English readers, as it was used in the King James Version of the Bible.

89
(diverging from https://yrm.org/you-state-we-accept-yahshua-as-an-elohim/ )

S2316 – theos – of uncertain affinity; a deity, especially (as ho theos) the supreme Divinity;
figuratively, a magistrate;
H430 – Elohim (2598x) Gen 1:1 etc.; [plural of H433 eloah (60x) Deu 32:15]; gods in the ordinary
sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God;
occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative.

Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew Lexicon:

1) (plural)
a) rulers, judges; b) divine ones; c) angels; d) gods
2) (plural intensive – singular meaning)
(a) God, a god, a goddess; (b) god-like one; (c) works or special possessions of God; (d)
the one true God; (e) God

Both elohim and theos encompass multiple meanings. While it can refer to Yahweh, our
Heavenly Father, it can also refer to false gods, angels, and human beings/persons. In short, it
refers to any exalted position. Regarding the Messiah, few would debate that He is to be exalted.
For this reason, He may be counted as an elohim.

The notable difference between Elohim/Theos and God is how the word is perceived within
Christianity for reference to a singular deity, but also to 'deities' ('persons') as it pertains to the
Trinity, unbiblical notion. Thus, elohim and theos as such for which English word god/God is
used as a translation word, contains a much broader meaning and can refer to anyone in an
exalted position. Yes, Jesus may be worshiped as 'Jesus is as God'; but it has turned into 'Jesus is
God', a God Jesus religion of a counterfeit Jesus ('Iesus Deus'), with confused relation between
YHWH Elohim and Yeshua Mashiah, the only-begotten Son, even to the blasphemous claim that
'Jehovah is identical to Jesus', whatever the word 'identical' is meant by them.

However, in the NT esp. the Gospels in the religious (Judaic) setting for the time and the people,
it should be known that Yeshua himself never claimed and believed he himself to be 'God' or 'a
God'. Never ever he mentioned and was aware that he himself was somehow pre-existent eternal
as 'God the Son', the unbiblical notion which began developed in the Hellenistic Christianity as it
parted away for Yeshua movement with the Judaism.

[Cf. The use of arthrous noun 'Elohim' (the God') and the context of G-Jn Ch. 20 is against the
Trinitarian interpretation that Thomas in John 20:28 refers the risen Yeshua as God (as a theos).]

90
God is God; God is not God
One true God to worship – Elohim the Most-High (≈ the Almighty Elohim). What does it mean
by ‘God’ – the word appearing in a certain text of the Bible? Or the expression coming out of
the mouth without being aware of who He is or which God? One God is the Father; the WHOLE
word of God clearly teaches is that THE ONE TRUE and ONLY ALMIGHTY God is the
FATHER ALONE who is THE God OVER his SON Yeshua whom He has HIGHLY
EXALTED ascended to the Father.

Everyone has a god, whether one is unconscious or not, and whether one denies or not (regardless one
is an atheist or not). Logically this statement cannot be disproved. But not everyone believes nor believes
in God, either of one’s own God-image or of others. “God is not god is not god” as each one starts with
one’s own definition. This is 'God problem', a problem of language, not of theology. What the word God
in someone's mind and language is not same as the word God in other's mind and language. God question
(of God theology) comes afterwards and only meaningfully be dealt with only after this issue is handled
to find a common ground of any argument on 'God' – God exists or not; believe God or not, etc.

(1) The very first question should be “What does it mean by <God>?” “What is God?”;a
(2) ‘What God’; ‘which God’; ‘what sort of God’ (e.g. Christian God, Catholic God,
Protestant God, Judaism God, etc.);
(3) ‘Who this God is?’, here the word ‘God’ is clearly seen to be ‘*Elohim the Most-
High’ (ho theos ho hupsistos) in a biblical parlance. That exclude all other Gods, incl.
Allah of Islam and, sadly, the called ‘God’ by most *Christianisms (various forms of
religious systems and practices as denominations and cults).
(4) How does this very God (the very Elohim) relate with the humanity? [Here
‘Christology’ comes in.]

The being of ‘God’ is not that which exists on its own. The God exists eternally has nothing to do with
humanity and history. The one and true God we find in the Scripture is the God who exists only in
relation to His creation. To use ‘God’ as a translation word is out of us with the minded of Greek-
philosophy. Since it is of Hebrew mindset, IRENT renders the Greek arthrous word ho theos (‘the God’)
as ‘Elohim’ (as if a Hebrew loan word).

Everyone has a god, whether one is unconscious or not, and whether one denies or not (regardless one
is an atheist or not). Logically this statement cannot be disproved. But not everyone believes nor believes
in God, either of one’s own God-image or of others. “God is not god is not god” as each one starts with
one’s own definition. This is 'God problem', a problem of language, not of theology. What the word God
in someone's mind and language is not same as the word God in other's mind and language.

“Is God a person?” “Does God have a [proper] name?” As shown in the Scripture and as well in the
history of His created world, He Himself has revealed Himself to be known with the name; not that God
is a being with a ‘personal’ name, not that He is a person. (He is personal – not ‘belonging to person’,
but being in personal relation), but is also supra-personal (Hans Küng 1993, Credo) b ; – He is not
‘literally’ a person, but He is and He reveals and expresses Himself to us as a person [in the person of
Yeshua, Mashiah of YHWH]. God is beyond the concept of person. He is the Ultimate Reality. With
personification and anthropomorphism, to bring down ‘God’ to the level of human mind.] The generic
God, a countable noun, can be a person (living or deceased), a thing, or a concept. See below ‘human

a
“What 'God' is” vs. “what God is”, the latter is about what kind of God or which God.
b
Ref. Hans Küng (1993), Credo – The Apostles’ Creed Explained for Today (pp. 86-87).
[www.academia.edu/815861/Hans_K%C3%BCng._1993._Credo._The_Apostles_Creed_... Book review]
91
 anthropology’ for the meaning of ‘person’. See also a separate file IRENT Vol. III – Supplements (b) –
On Trinity Problem.]

• Say ‘believe God’? What is meant by ‘God’? What is meant by ‘believe’?

• Which God? Whose God? Have no God? Bother not; you can believe Gods.
• Not believe God? Believe not which God? Whose God? Worry not; you can have
god/God of your choice.

‘Where is God’ is not a metaphysical question of where God exists, but rather a rhetoric one, i.e. “Ah,
where is He!?”, because the former cannot be naively answered as (1) ‘in Heaven’, because ‘heaven’ is
here used where God is, and (2) omnipresence (everywhere) or immanence (in one’s mind etc.) is not a
satisfactory theological or metaphysical answer but a mere ‘explaining away’.

Common questions on ‘God’ – ‘Do you have God’ ‘Do you believe God’ will remain unanswerable, as
long as the word ‘God’ is dealt with – meaning, definition, usagea, etc. With its basic sense ‘god-being’
the word God is often used as metonymic – e.g. ‘presence of God’ < ‘presence of God’s spirit’.

What does in mean by ‘believe’

How is it used differently from ‘believe in God’?
What does it mean by ‘God’?
[Not as religious issue, but linguistic. God as a well-worn religious and theological jargon, a
mere translation word, is not the very God in the Scripture who makes to come to us.]
‘God is not God’ → God is not God whom we think we know. Everyone’s God is not
same or identical.b

‘God’ we say or call is not same as the God in the Scripture. English word ‘God’ as used in the
Bible is simply a translation word; even in the GNT the Greek theos is what is used as a
translation word for Hebrew Elohim. In essence, English word ‘god’ or Gk. ‘theos’ means as
god-being. God is god; god is God, but the capitalized word God as in written English fails to
reveal which God. Only the context gives us a clue about what is referred to. In Greek, it is the
arthrous word ho theos (the God), which tell us that the true God of the Scripture is referred to.
It is equivalent to Elohim in Hebrew, even though this Hebrew word was used to refer to other
than the YHWH Elohim, including human beings.

The true God of the Scripture, Elohim or ho theos (the God) is one God,c who has revealed
Himself as "the Father, the Son, and the holy spirit" (Mt 28:19) to us. Every God’s action in
the world is accomplished by the Father, because of His love, working through the Son and in
the power of the Spirit. This G-d has revealed Himself in creation and in the history of
humanity, especially of His chosen people ‘Israel’ [not to be equated with the modern State of
Israel], as transmitted in Scripture. (Gen 1:1; 1Co 8:6; Eph 4:4-6)

a Even an expletive ‘God damn it’ makes a perfectly acceptable sense when the word ‘God’ is none other than oneself.
‘Oh my god’ is no more than calling out oneself.
b In the similar vein, everyone’s ‘Jesus’ is not same; Jesus of Catholics, of Mormons, of Charismatics, of Jehovah’s

Witnesses, not same.

c ‘one God’ – The word God for Elohim in the Scripture should not be thought of a countable noun (one out of many).

92
 A statement; <God is God> → God is the God whom we should know.
Or <God is not God>
Here the word 'God' needs to be put in quotation marks to indicate the word itself is not
what the readers have in their mind. This would be of help even in the translation of NT,
if the word 'God' is used (IRENT has it as 'Elohim' for the arthrous ho theos, not as 'God'.)

In ordinary English usage, the word means anything, any person, or any idea which we confer
supernatural power. That is the basic meaning of even the Hebrew word ‘el’ (god) – mighty
one. This is the core source of confusion, conflict, and contention of ‘God’. E.g. ‘Jesus is God’;
He was a man, not God, etc. ‘God’ in Mormonism is in this sense and has nothing to do with
YHWH Elohim. [Cf. Korean language has, in place of a kanji derived word 신 (sin; 神), several
native words for ‘god’. The word 하나님 is a translation word specifically adopted from the
earliest Korean Bible translation (1887 for NT; 1911 for OT & NT; by Ross from Scotland; Cf.
in his translation of G-Luke). The Catholic translations later adopted more generic word
하느님.a

A common statement <I believe God> is problematic. That someone says ‘I believe God’
actually does not mean much by itself. If we agree for a common ground, God is that which
one believe, the statement ‘one believes God’b is a tautological nonsense, esp. when which God
is not settled for discussion here.

Ah, ‘*God is not God’ → When we say 'God is God', that's that. The end of debate, a stop.
However, with the statement 'God is not God', we can go further. Both statements together are
not contradictory or illogical.

The truth is, it is '*God is as God', nothing else. It is (1) because the word 'God' or 'god' is left
undefined (and unexamined) for any logical argument, and (2) because the word in each instant
is out of different speaker and in different context. The first (lexical) group is those usages in
ordinary non-religious usage. E.g. 'O my god' 'God bless' 'In God we trust', 'God willing', etc.
This group is outside our discussion throughout the writings of various titles accumulated in
the work of IRENT translation of N.T

What does we mean by ‘God’? A person, a thing, an invisible thing (like ‘force’), a concept,
or an idea? What we come to this word, we should be aware that it is simply a translation word
of Greek word theos. Whether it is a title or not, it itself is not an identity. Even the Greek word
‘theos’ is simply a translation word for Hebrew elohim.

[Just think of how people translate the word into their own language! The word 神 in kanji
means a ‘ghost (such as of a deceased person)’ in Korean vocabulary is used as equivalent to
God/god. Each language has to pick something of their own vocabulary outside the biblical
concept.

aRef: Sung-Wook Hong (2008), Naming God in Korea: The Case of Protestant Christianity.
www.academia.edu/3728125/_Competing_Chinese_Names_for_God_The_Chinese_Term_Question_and_Its_Influence
_upon_Korea_ www.koreanbible.or.kr/koreanbible/
Sun Kim (2010), The Northern Region of Korea: History, Identity, and Culture.] Sebastian Kim (2008), Christian
Theology in Asia]
b
Why, even demons believe God. Cf. Jam 2:19 is in different sense and context
www.faithalone.org/magazine/y1992/92nov3.html
93
 Practically speaking, god is God; it is only an English convention by which a word capitalized
carries a different sense. However, any language, esp. biblical languages, is a spoken language
in which no capitalization can reside. Matter of fact, whether it is spoken by a God-believer or
not, the word appears on the lips of anyone. ‘God bless’, ‘God willing’, ‘God (con)damn’, etc.
without any clue of what the word is meant or intended by a speaker.

The word ‘God/god’ is often an object of verbs. ‘believe ~’, ‘worship ~’, ‘love ~’ – what does
it mean by ‘believe’ ‘worship’ ‘love’, etc.? ‘Fear God’ – does anyone really fear Him? What
we see in Westernized Christianity is to 'apply God’ for one’s own use, theological, creedal,
religious, spiritual, or preaching purpose.

The Platonic concept of ‘God’ is far from the Hebrew concept of Elohim. One’s concept of
God is from different from someone else’s, be a believer or not.

A question on 'believe God' ‘do you believe God?’

A question may come up to answers to a question 'do you believe God':

(1) ‘yes’ – is it same as ‘god’?
(2) ‘no’ – is it same as anti-God?
(3) ‘don’t know’ – is it rather ‘it doesn't concern me' or 'don’t’ care about’?

It really does not matter at this stage whether it is phrased as ‘believe God’ or ‘believe God’.
An answer with discerning mind would be a counter-question, such as ‘Why you’re asking?’,
‘What does it mean to believe God?’ or 'Which God?'.

‘Believe’ – what does it mean? ‘believe something’ ‘believe someone’?

I believe the future – (a foolish saying by itself)

I believe the President – (nothing foolish than this)
I believe the weather report – (right except when it turns out to be wrong)
I believe me – (an astute statement; cannot be incorrect.

To ‘believe in’ in the Scripture means ‘to place one’s Life in’ with Life (zoē and psuchē – life
experience; one’s being), not life (bios). Cf. believe, trust, entrust, rely, be convinced of; be
certain of;

‘God problem’ - ‘God’ – what does it mean by God? which God? who is ‘God’?

"God is God"?? This is a rhetorical question. Or, God is not God? The solution we can find is in
the word 'as'. Yes, God is as God. As God you thinking He is, or as want to argue about. That
'God' in my speech can be same, or even identical exactly as in your speech is simply impossible
logically speaking. It is like using the term 'point'. In mathematics, it is used as if something is a
point, since it has no dimension but exists in space, physical and mental. [See The Philosophy of
'As if' by Hans Vaihinger (1911), translated by C.K. Ogden 1924.] For that matter, any debate or
argument, when it starts without precisely laying down definitions, at least agreed-upon working
definitions, of the words or terms (especially so when these are of a common vocabulary, it is
doomed to have any conclusion which satisfies both sides of the argument on any kind of issues.a

a In reality, our life is life of "as if". (Cf. a vicarious life.) Such questions we are presented – 'Does God exist?', 'If God
is, why evil?', 'God is dead?', 'Is religion bad or good?', etc., etc. To any statement, proposition or claim, our rational and
natural response should begin with 'What did you say' → 'So …?', to be followed by' So then?' and, if needed, 'So what?'.
Again, 'God' come out of our mouth or pen may not be the God of the Scripture – Elohim, YHWH Adonai.
94
 All of those who vehemently deny God or say they don’t believe God do actually believe a God
who goes by one’s own name. They believe in the Self. Stephen Hawkings does believe a God;
the name of his god is ‘Stephen William Hawkings’, the tile is the Knowing-Almost-All. Nietzsche
believed god which is named 'Nietzsche' – yes as he correctly said, that very God is dead surely.

‘The God of faith and the God of philosophers’; ‘God of the religion and God of the Scripture’

God is God. It seems that the main problem besetting our humanity is whether one believe
in God or not believe. A truth is that one does not come to the Bible to ‘believe in God’,
because everyone does believe in a God. The problem is who God is. The Scripture does not
tell that people should believe in ‘God’, but it reveals who God is, that is, the God of
Scripture – the very Elohim of Abraham, Elohim of Yitzchak (> Isaac), Elohim of Yaakob
(Mt 22:32, etc.) whom Yeshua called ‘Abba, Father’. When we utter the word ‘God’ in our
everyday language, most of time it does not have or require a connection to the God of the
Scripture, Elohim whose revealed name is YHWH.

‘God is God is God’? No. God problem! In our life we have problem with our own ‘self’. When it comes
to the Bible, we have to deal with this god problem first before we can get to other stuffs such as
*theologya.

Does God have problems? [e.g. ‘If God, why evil’, etc.] No, it is we have problems of God. The problem
(or question) of the first order is ‘What is God?’ When people say ‘I believe in God’b what does it mean
by that? The question looms larger when we realize that everyone states the same question, but God
actually means different for each person. Yes, even for atheists or agnostics; demons, even Satanists, say
they believe God. Then it is inevitable to understand the phrase ‘believe in God’ means not different
from ‘believe in a God’. Yes, even the Bible says there are many Gods. Notice that in English we spell
differently as God or god as if the spelling brings different meaning. No, the word means same, whether
capitalized or not, ‘a mighty one’ – be it a person, thing, idea, or an invisible force, etc.

There, we have God problem, that is ‘What is God?’, but before that we have to tackle ‘what does it
mean by God – by you, by me, by someone else, a speaker or a writer. The fact of our life is that the
same word does not mean same at all to every one of us. When someone writes ‘we need God!’ 'O my
God' (as when experiencing troubles in life, family, society, and world), it really means ‘we need a God’
– otherwise it would border on blasphemy (dishonoring the name of God in the Scripture). God is treated
no different than a genie in the Aladdin’s lamp to be invoked by rubbing on it. Such an exclamation has
no point since it is a fact that everyone has God or Gods. The foremost one is one’s own Self. It is the
principal God for atheists and agnostics. For the people of religions, the Self is replaced by God(s), those
mightier than oneself, a mere mortal human being – called ‘God’ among other Gods.

Then comes a next question – ‘what does it mean to ‘believe’ such a God? To find an answer to this, we
move from the question ‘What God' to the very central question – ‘Who is God?’ and then ‘Which God?’,
‘Who is the God?’ and, last but not least, 'What does it mean by 'God'?

a ‘theology’ – that is, ‘God-talk’ (learning and expounding on things related to God-being). It’s a talk (study) about God,
not God’s talk. What is in the Scripture is proclamation and revelation. No ‘theologies’ or ‘doctrines’ are actually in
the Scripture, but all are our human construct from human minds. To come up with such ‘God-talk’ is affected from its
core by eisegesis, anthropomorphism, and anachronism to fit for their ideology from the very process of Bible translation
to Bible reading and interpretation. Such a danger eventually leads human minds astray from the truth and turn them to
create a God after their own image without coming to know who the true God is. He is brought down to our level so that
He can be dealt and manipulated with our inadequate mind and imprecise language, without letting the Spirit of Elohim
liberate our spirit.
b “Many believe. They believe as if they do believe; they do believe as if they believe. Some do quite well; some don’t

so well.”
95
 The statement ‘we need God’ should be replaced with the statement ‘we need to know God’, to know
who He is – especially so for Christians. Who is the God of the Scripture? Does He have a name? What
is the name? What does it mean that God has a name?

*Jesus as God

'Jesus is God'; 'Jesus became God' ('Jesus was made God' from 4th c. on by Greco-Roman
Christianity – Constantine Catholic Church. – parted from the Apostolic Christianity, a Messianic
movement in the Second Temple Judaism, early 1st century, after Yeshua the Nazarene). The Son of
God in the NT is replaced by 'God the Son' of 'God Jesus' ('Iesus Deus'). a [<YHWH is identical with
'Jesus'>?? by Irenaeus? (to check the source)]

People may worship, pray to and praise Him; and call upon His name. They say they believe Jesus is
God. Which Jesus? Jesus in the Gospels? In the Acts, the risen Master or Lord?

However, the word 'God' of their God Jesus is not the God of the Bible, but a church lingo. That does
not mean that the claim that Jesus sis God is wrong. In our language any person, anything visible,
anything invisible, etc. can be called 'God' or 'god', just as Caesar was 'God' to the Romans. The
question is why he is ever called God and in what sense. (See on 'how Jesus became God', on web
search. It is more accurately 'how Jesus has been made God' by Church brains. It is a linguistic
problem, but it has become a theological contentious issue. Yes, what actually we should say honesty
is that we 'believe Him AS God', not 'believe He is God'.

How we can say the name of our God is Jesus (e.g. a twitter of the pastor Mark Driscoll)? Unless
Christianity has become Jesus Religion? Whatever happened to YHWH, the very name of Elohim?
The biblical word 'Lord' does not mean a title for God. Yes, He is Lord, not a liar or lunatic or legend.
However, by 'Lord Jesus' does in mean 'God Jesus'? A polytheistic idea; not much different than what
we get from Jn 1:1c 'and the Word was a god' in NWT, except that Jesus is a god standing inferior to
God (the Father) according to the Jehovah's Witnesses. [Does 'Lord' mean God come in flesh? For
which and whose Lord? And what God, which God and whose God is this 'God'. The Bible is this
much clear and unambiguous: he never called himself God; never claimed to be God, never told he
was to be 'worship' and they worship their 'God' – at least 'Yeshua' in the New Testament, not Jesus of
the Church. Paul would have nothing to do with. If it were, he would really be lunatic or liar. It is
possible that 'Jesus' of Jesus religion (worshiping God whose name is 'Jesus') might have done that by
reading the Bible as their source book to be used in pick and choose eisegesis.]

Position 1: Jesus is God – the response is to be 'How so?' 'So?' 'So then?' 'So what' 'For what?' –
implication for liturgy and for ministry (Machael Morwood)
Position 2: Jesu is not God – the response is to be 'Why? 'Why no?.

Biblical (NT) creed:

(1) "YHWH is our Elohim; YHWH [alone] is one, [one true Elohim]" (Mk 12:29 – Shema Israel)
(2) Yeshua is Lord (Rm 10:9; 1Co 12:3; Phi 2:11) – Lord of Life; not Lord God - = Col 2:6
(Mashiah Yeshua as the Lord); 'One Lord ~~~ One God' (Eph 4:5-6).

a
A statement, 'The name of our God is Jesus' – on a Trinitarian pastor twitter.
96
Trinitarian's favorite proof-texts recruited for juggernaut eisegesis:

[Note: that Jesus is God (or He is God-man), is not same as He is divine, being embodiment
of the Word of Elohim (Jn 1:1, 14).]

https://unlockingthebible.org/2017/01/bible-qa-where-does-the-bible-say-that-jesus-is-god/
https://biblereasons.com/jesus-is-god/

Jn 1:1 – Misinterpreting 'the Word of Elohim as Jesus, eternal, pre-existing God the Son.
Jn 1:14 – 'Incarnate Word' is changed into 'God Incarnate' (variations – 'Incarnate God' 'Incarnate
Jesus' 'Incarnate eternal Jesus' 'Incarnate eternal God the Son', etc.)
Mt 1:23 – misreading of 'Immanuel' compounded with virgin birth myth that Jesus did not have
human father, but his father is the Holy God, not God the Father!
Mk 2:5-7 – authority to forgive sins is given to Yeshua; that he forgave sins is not because he was
God.
Jn 1:18 – corrupt mss quoted
Jn 5:18 – Son calling God Father – 'to be equal', i.e. standing equal. They read it as 'identical'.
Jn 10:30 – 'The Father and I are one' – not identity, not same nature, but one in purpose, carrying
out His will.
Jn 17:21;
Jn 20:28 – 'My Master and my Elohim' – Thomas was not claiming the risen Master is now his
'God'.

Phi 2:5-7. – 'in God's form' 'being equal to God'. They misinterpret as 'having God's nature' and
'identical to God'
Col 1:15 – by him all things are created. It is about new creation by Yeshua – all things under
heaven and on earth; not Genesis creation of the heavens and the earth.
Col 2:9 – 'In Mashiah all the fullness of God-being dwells bodily' - = incarnate word, not 'God
incarnate' or 'incarnate God' – it is embodiment of the word of Elohim in the person of Yeshua.
2Pe 1:1 – of our Elohim and Savior Yeshua Mashiah, not 'of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ'.
Heb 1:2 – '(the Son) sustains all things by the utterance of his power' – not 'upholds the universe'.
It is not about any angel or any man or superhuman man. But is it because Jesus is God?
Heb 1:8 – 'thy throne, O God' – mistaking 'thy' construed to 'God'.
1Jn 5:10 – 'He is the true God and eternal life' is simply construed to the preceding phrase 'Yeshua
Mashiah'
Jn 8:58 – 'I am' is wrongly read as the Divine Name, YHWH. Same for Jn 13:19 'I am [who I am]'.
Jn 8:22-24 – Yeshua forgives sins – taking this to make Jesus God.
Act 28:28 – bought with the blood of his own [son] – is read as 'bought with his own blood'

The word 'to worship' as a translation word in NT is understood to be applied only to 'God' – Mt 2:2; Mt
28:9; - the Greek word has nothing to the with 'worshiping God'. English word 'to worship' may be in
reference to anyone or anything, other than a 'God-being', but 'worship them as God'. Even 'Jesus' may
be worshiped as God, but nowhere He was worshiped as God in the NT.
A *triadic phrase in Mt 28:29; 2Co 13:14, and 1Jn 5:7b v.l. – it has nothing to do with their 'Jesus =
God
[See in the file <Walk through the Scripture #1 - Words, Words and Words>.

97
 Anthropology – concept of human being, human person

¶ “Humanity, humanity! You have a problem” [in the tone of ‘Houston, we have a problem’ from
Apollo 13 movie script, but in opposite setting.]

Don’t we have God problems! (not ‘problems with God’)

Questions: ‘How many Gods are there? One, a few, many, or none?
‘How many Gods do you have?
‘Which God is it? Who is this God?’ ‘What is God?’ ‘Do you believe (in) God?’ etc.

‘Belief in one God’? ‘Belief in only one God’? ‘There are no other Gods’? ‘Worship one God’?

‘Do you believe in God?’ A good question. Yes, a serious question. The question of questions which lie
at the root of every religious, doctrinal, and theological division and disunity in human realm of religions.

The response would be one of the followings:

(1) 'What did you say' → (2) Yes; No; I don’t know; (3) I cannot answer. I refuse
to answer, etc. → (4) 'So what'; 'So then …'
But the honest answer should be a question back – What does it mean? Why you ask? It is simply because
God is not God is not God. 'God' I say is not same as 'God' you say and is not 'God' they say. 'God' I say
now is not same as 'God' I said before and will not be same as 'God' I will say in a different setting. There
is no evidence that all worship the same God; in fact, everyone worships one’s own god; and the Bible
tells that there are many gods in the world.

A common English word ‘God’, which as a common word in the English Bibles carries several problems
at the linguistic level – not easily recognized as such and has affected theological talks. Theology is ‘God-
talk’, talk about God.

It is not an exclusive to Christian religions, but common in secular language. The English ‘god’ is from
a word of Germanic language origin, indigenous religions. It is a word with the sense of ‘mighty one’ as
mortal human beings are aware of their powerlessness and turns to something or someone more
powerful.a This word of pagan origin is often heard in frivolous expressions and swearing words in
everyday English.

It appears in the misunderstood Nietzsche’s statement ‘God is dead’2. It is said the Satanists
believe in God too [p. 40 in Anton LaVey (1969), Satanic Bible3. Most religions say ‘believe in
God’, with the only exception of Buddhism in which the very word and concept of ‘God’ is not
developed.

The expression ‘believe in God’ is found in the Bibles, but not in the Scripture, in which we read
only ‘believe in the God’, that is, ‘believe in Elohim’ that we read the Almighty Creator in the
Scripture, who has revealed Himself to humanity.

How to we pull ourselves from such question? It is only possible to look into the Name, the very name
Elohim Himself has spoken. No word is more important than ‘name’ in the Scripture, as everything the

a
‘To believe in God is to believe in a higher power’ [in www.wikihow.com/Believe-in-God is a typical
unscriptural pseudo-Christian idea. How to find God in Church Doctrine (www.wikihow.com/Find-God-
in-Church-Doctrine )?! No, you cannot find, nor you need to. You have to find out what is meant by
'God', to begin with.
98
 Scripture proclaims has to stand on the foundation the name holds – the name which is what stands for
the very Reality, not an identification of a person as in the case of names of human beings. a

It is important to see that we worship not the name, but Elohim Himself, and that we honor not Elohim,
but His name.

a
“Without a name there is no real existence” “The names of … represents their actuality” … “In much
the same way, the Hebrews also attached special importance to the concept of names.” – GH Parke-
Taylor (1979), Yahweh, the Divine Name in the Bible. www.scribd.com/doc/9629729/Yahweh [Cf.
Cassuto (trans. 1967), A Commentary on the Book of Exodus, p. 37, "Whatever is without an appellation
does not exist, but whatever has a denomination has existence."]
99
Divine name in NT

• Some should be revealed where the word itself is something to be revealed.

[E.g. 'YHWH' in place of 'Lord' or 'LORD']

Having the very name of Elohim in the New Testament translation is a controversial and
contentious issue, especially since such practice is based on religious doctrinal and ideological
peculiarities of the translators. There are numerous translations, both in English and non-
English, where this name appears in various forms and pronunciations.

From purely linguistic and literary approach to translation, which is taken by IRENT in
translating from Greek text, we have to know the problem of Greek word ‘kurios’. The word
is a Greek translation word in the majority of LXX translation of Hebrew TaNaKh (‘Old
Testament’). Though earlier manuscript of LXX has it as Tetragrammaton in Paleo-Hebrew
letters.a

Even for translation of the Old Testament, traditional English translations have it rendered as
LORD in similar fashion to LXX, despite their claim that they used Hebrew text as the base
text. This is disingenuous and unbiblical.

Since Greek New Testament texts have it all as ‘kurios’, is there a justifiable place of
representing Tetragrammaton in the NT English translation – in harmony with the Scripture,
not in keeping with man’s doctrine?

To have it where the text is such that the very Name has to be revealed a few principles are not
difficult to find. At first, it is wherever the text is quoting from the TaNaKh (aka OT) when the
speaker and audience of the quoted text are appropriate for the Name. E.g. Mt 21:9 (and
parallel) – the phrase ‘en onomati kuriou’ (most translates as ‘in the name of the Lord’ cf. ‘in
Jehovah’s name’ (NWT). This is rendered in IRENT as ‘in the name of Adonai’, not ‘in the
name of YHWH’. Here ‘Adonai’ is a Hebrew loanword, equivalent to ‘the LORD’ in OT
translation in KJV, and others, which is actually translation of LXX and Masoretic.

• Some should be re-discovered to be more appropriate in the Scriptural text.

[E.g. Elohim in place of ‘the God’ ← 'God', as English convention does not use it
with the definite article. The capitalized ‘God’ cannot by itself distinguish from a generic
notion of God (God, a God, a god, etc.)]

Before we can argue properly about ‘religion’, we need the first premise, which should be
intuitive and logical standing on the common ground.
• A statement: religion deals with God and man, whatever different ways the
term ‘religion’ ‘God’ and ‘man’ are defined precisely.
• As a corollary: God is God and man is man; never the twain shall meet.
• All that is in religion is whatever exists and happens between God and man.
This holds true in Judaism and Islam. Surprisingly the Christianity most accustomed to does
not. It has severed its umbilical cord from the original Yeshua Movement which was rooted
within the first century Judaism (of the Second Temple Period in Jewish History - 530 BCE
and 70 CE). The authentic Apostolic spirit has essentially disappeared. In place of Yeshua as

a
Ref. http://wp.me/pYZXr-Dd (Provenance of Aquila OT Genizah Manuscripts). Also Treatment of
Tetragrammaton in Septuagint manuscripts

100
 the son of Elohim, a different God is carved out made of Hellenistic and syncretic ‘Jesus’,
being labelled as ‘God’, ‘God the Son’, or ‘God-man’ who is human being but not human
person, but divine person. Some say Jesus became God. But he did not; he was made to be
their God.

God, god, a god, GOD -- Capitalization is, in a sense, deceptive, though convenient English
convention. Spoken vs. written – why should it come diffident to our mind?

• What is God; what does it mean by ‘God’.

• What God? Which God? Whose God? – ‘God’ (Allah) of Muslim, God of
Catholics, God of Mormons, ‘God’ of Judaism, and ‘God’ of others, whatever
and however the word is meant and used – all are not same and cannot be
same, all created in the image of mortal human. All the religious contentions
and wars find its root here because people do not realize that, when they claim
and talk about God, they are not talking about the same God. All the religions,
denominations and cults need to talk to each other on the same language.

• Who is God? Who is the God? Then, how so?

When is it the biblical God that we have in mind, should it not actually be ‘the God’, putting
aside Greek usage of the definite article as in ‘ho theos’?

A personal God – what does it mean by ‘personal’ – belonging to us, possessed by us

personally? Or a ‘person god’, not ‘thing’ or ‘idea’?

God/GOD/god – can be any person, thing, idea, or even multiples, plural, etc.

‘God is a person’? What (sort of) God is a person?

How can the biblical God be a person, even a spirit? Is He (it) as a noun countable (as a bound
noun)? Is He that small in our thought, that which can be manipulated and handled by human
minds (metaphysically, theologically)?

As the one true God, Elohim YHWH, the biblical God cannot be a person, no matter how the
word person is defined. He is only as a person (as Abba) whom we are let experience and
encounter.

Ref. Larry Hurtado (2010), God in the New Testament Theology.

[Note: in his book the word God is usually bracketed as "God".] [A copy of Introduction
and Amazon book-reviews in <IRENT Vol. III – Supplement (Collections #3A1 – God,
Yeshua, & Names)>]
[https://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2018/03/24/god-in-new-testament-theology/ ]
[https://youtu.be/A1JDMNRM4dw
Furthermore, we do not have anywhere in the NT a systemic or comprehensive treatment of "God".]
Book Review - www.academia.edu/6701820/Review_- Hurtados_God_in_NT_Theology]

101
Vocab: god, gods, deity, divinity

Vocab: God, god, gods; deity; God-being; god-being; a divine being; *Godhead Deity,
Divinity,
Vocab: divine (someone is ~. ~ power; ~ majesty, ~ nature, etc.) ['God is divine' – oxymoronic];
divineness, divinity
Vocab: Trinity; ‘Oneness of God’, 'triad', triadic, unitarian, binitarian, dyadic, – theological
terms.
Vocab: ‘divine person’ ‘divine nature’ ‘God nature’ 'essence' 'substance' 'hypostasis', etc.
Greek words in NT –
Other than S2316 theos (mostly arthrous ‘the God’ – RENT consistently renders it as
'Elohim' throughout)a; and anarthrous as 'God', God-being or a god.:
• S2304 theios (3x) adj. – divine 2Pe 1:3 ('~ power'), 1:4 ('~ nature'). to theion Act
17:29 /the divine-being; /x: the deity – NET; /xx: the Godhead – KJV, YLT; /xx: the
Divine Nature – NASB, WEB;
• S2305 theiotēs (1x Rm 1:20) – divine nature [/xx: Godhead – KJV, YLT; /xx:
divinity – ERV, Berean Literal, Jubilee2k, WEB;
• S2320 theotēs (1x Col 2:9) – the state of divine-being; divine quality (x: God's
personality); /x: divinity; /xx: deity
• Cf. 'Godhead'b [a trinitarian jargon] – used 3x to translate theosis (Act 17:29), theiotes
(Rm 1:20) and theotes (Col 2:9) in KJV after Wycliffe (1395) and Tyndale (1525).
• ‘God-being’, 'god', ‘divine being’ ‘(ontological) divine nature’ ‘divine quality’ ‘all that
God is’ ‘Godship – NWT Rm 1:20) ‘Godhead’ – these theological and translational
jargons are difficult to pin down their difference.
• Cf. Eph 3:19 – ‘the fullness of Elohim’; Col 1:19 'the fullness (of God-being)'
God, god, gods, god-like beings, mighty ones, elohim (vs. Elohim); (tribal, pagan) tutelary god;
수호신 (守護神);

Most people of 'Churchianity' (or 'Christianism') turn even the true God (YHWH Elohim) into
their tutelary god which would do their bidding (e.g. ‘bless me’ with prosperity, heath, wealth,
and pleasure. [Cf. a genie in Aladdin’s lamp; ‘sacred grove and tree worship’ ‘statures’]
'God' of the Bible – The word Elohim in the Scripture hinges on three: (1) His name; (2) His
glory (Cf. Jn Ch. 17); (3) His Will and His kingdom reign. (See WB #1 *Kingdom of God).

a
See below with two examples of 2Co 4:4 and Phi 3:9.
bc. 1200, "divine nature, deity, divinity," from god + Middle English -hede (see -head). Along with
maidenhead, the sole survival of this form of the suffix. Old English had godhad "divine nature." Parallel form
godhood is from early 13c., now chiefly restricted to "state or condition of being a god."
www.etymonline.com/word/godhead
102
One God; monotheism, monaltry
*one God; monotheism, monaltry;
1Co 8:6, (4) one God
Jn 17:3 the only true God
1Tm 2:5 Indeed, there is one and only God [we worship] also one and only
mediator between God and humanity — Himself a man, Mashiah Yeshua,
Jam 2:19 you do believe that there is one God! Big deal! Even the demons
believe that, too! — yes, they tremble [with fear].
Eph 4:6; one God and Father of [us] all
Mk 12:29, YHWH is our Elohim; YHWH alone is one – one true Elohim; (Cf. 12:32)
Rm 3:30 Elohim is only one
(cf. Lk 18:19) '… except one, the very Elohim'

103
On the English word ‘God’:

Cf. Notion of 'God'; concept of God'; idea of 'God'; meaning of God; definition of God.

'*divine':
To be 'divine' means 'to be like God' or 'to be as God'. That someone or something is divine does not
mean he or it is a God or a 'God-being' or even 'what God is'. God himself is not what we can describe
as 'divine' (tautological?). That someone is divine does not mean someone is God. The expression
'divine God' is an oxymoron, unless 'God' is used as a generic sense of 'a god', that is, 'a divine god-
being. Something of God may be divine, e.g. 'the Word of God'. Divine is 'the [only-begotten] son of
Elohim', not '[a] son of God'. Cf. Divine glory, divine word, etc. English word divine is also used as
an adjective as 'comparable to God', or unrelated to God-being.

Cf. divine things, divine name, divine man, divine person, divine words, divine will, divine nature,
divine essence, divine substance (?)

From www.newadvent.org/cathen/06608x.htm

Etymology of the Word "God"

(Anglo-Saxon God; German Gott; akin to Persian khoda; Hindu khooda). Cf. Hebrew 'el' 'elohim';
Arabic 'allah']

God can variously be defined as: [Note: when the word is spoken and written, it is used in
most cases it is without giving a plausible and clear-cut definition, leading to various
ideas and beliefs on ‘God’ and confused referents of the word. Even in the central
doctrine of Trinity by Constantine Roman Christianism, there is no definition of the
word ‘God’ and talking and arguing of their unbiblical trinity God. – ARJ]

• the proper name of the one Supreme and Infinite Personal Being, the Creator and Ruler
of the universe, to whom man owes obedience and worship;
• the common or generic name of the several supposed beings to whom, in polytheistic
religions, Divine attributes are ascribed and Divine worship rendered;
• the name sometimes applied to an idol as the image or dwelling-place of a god.

The root-meaning of the name (from Gothic root gheu; Sanskrit hub or emu, "to invoke or to
sacrifice to") is either "the one invoked" or "the one sacrificed to". From different Indo-Germanic
roots (div, "to shine" or "give light"; thes in thessasthai "to implore") come the Indo-Iranian deva,
Sanskrit dyaus (gen. divas), Latin deus, Greek theos, Irish and Gaelic dia, all of which are generic
names; also Greek Zeus (gen. Dios, Latin Jupiter (jovpater), Old Teutonic Tiu or Tiw (surviving
in Tuesday), Latin Janus, Diana, and other proper names of pagan deities. The common name
most widely used in Semitic occurs as 'el in Hebrew, 'ilu in Babylonian, 'ilah in Arabic, etc.; and
though scholars are not agreed on the point, the root-meaning most probably is "the strong or
mighty one".

104
 On the English word ‘God’:

The word ‘God’ is the word which is to be dealt in connection with the Bible. Why, theology itself
means the study on ‘God’. Here we have a concern about the vocabulary of ‘God’, ‘god’, ‘a god’, ‘a
God’, or ‘the God’ in English. [See elsewhere also for logic, logical statement and proposition.]

‘I believe God’ – what does it mean? what does it tell. Do not ever buy when someone says ‘God’,
until and unless what God is meant is clear. Otherwise, they are simply God-peddlers and
blasphemers. Do not ever say ‘God’ or ‘I believe God’, until and unless it is clear what God is meant.

The word ‘God’ (in capitalized form) is the almost universal translation word in the Bible for Hebrew
Elohim and the Geek theos. Unless it is in the setting of the Bible, the use of the word in our written
or spoken English it does not necessarily connect to the God of the Bible. E.g. The expression ‘proof
of the existence of God’ is dealing with what God is for their language and mind – the Ultimate One
is not that which can be proved to exist. It’s actually presumptuous idea that we human can prove it,
as if it is the construct of our mind and can be subject to manipulate and examine for precise analysis
as if a mathematical term. God we can prove is not the God in the Bible. It is another god, created
after our image and imagination. E.g. ‘Do you believe God?’ – the honest reply is not ‘yes, no, or I
don’t know’, but ‘so?’ – spoken in the tone of ‘what the heck God is? What the heck ‘believe’ means?
E.g. ‘Believe God’ – so? how? for what? E.g. Is ‘God’ someone who hears and answers our ‘prayer’
or ‘request’? It is a function of religion, but God per se.

While the arthrous Gk. ho theos is rendered in most English Bibles as ‘God’ capitalized, an
unambiguous translation as ‘the God’ could be an alternative, for there is no difference at all between
‘God’ and ‘god’ in spoken English – it is all implicit or assumed from the context and the speaker’s
intention. The definite article in English does carry an (unnecessary) additional overtone of
particularizing the word, e.g. as ‘the aforementioned God’. However, the convention is difficult to
overcome, and the diction is too rough to hear it not a few times in the Bible in English translation.

To solve this important translation problem, IRENT has ‘Elohim’ instead of ‘the God’ or ‘God’ to
render the arthrous Greek, which always refers to YHWH Elohim, not any other God, god, god-
being, God-man, demigod, or human beings. That does not mean that the word 'God' in common
English usage is to be changed to 'Elohim'. The word Elohim in Hebrew is just like 'God' in English
and may refer to other that the Almighty Creator (in which case it is uncapitalized as 'elohim'), e.g.
angels and humans in power and position as well as pagan deities. The anarthrous theos can be used
in the sense of ‘a god’, but this English form always denotes a pagan or false god. The Greek
anarthrous nouns, even countable nouns, can also function as adjectival a

It is vital for us to have clear understanding of the most common English word, (in the top 5 for
nouns in the word list) in our linguistic and literary approach for the Scripture, much of discussion
and debate have been and will be wasted by opposing sides of doctrinal position. b

a
[adjectival, not as an adjective] E.g. English word ‘man’: The sentence ‘He is man’ is in a quite
different sense from ‘He is a man’. [Also different from ‘he is the man’ or 'the person is a man.] To say
‘it is a god’ is quite different from ‘it is god/God’. Rendering ‘a god’ in Jn 1:1c as in NWT fails to go
beyond glossary grammar level, ignoring the whole range of how a word is used in the context. The
Scripture text does not say ‘the Logos was a god’!! It could be read as ‘the Logos was god’ (v. 1c),
while ‘the Logos was towards the God’ in 1:1b. Here again, the connotation of ‘god’ is one among
many gods, even of other religions or pagan myths.
b
As for the word it is also used in English often meaninglessly and even as an expletive or a swear word!
Theologically the word is applied to anyone, anything, incl. angels.
105
By the way, the issue of having a proper definition of meaning of any word, term, or concept, and of
properly delimiting its use is of a paramount importance for all our fields in any way related to
languages (words, speeches, and literature) and logic so that we all stand on the common ground of
communication and understanding with mutual respect.

‘God’ of someone is not same as ‘God’ of others; ‘God’ of someone does not stay same all the time
when spoken or used. Even the word used by atheists is not same as by others. God of a religion is
not same as God of other religions. God of Catholics is not same as God of non-Catholics. The word
itself in the Bible does not have same meaning for every time it occurs. Cf. idea of 'God', concept of
'God', notion of 'God'; definition of 'God'

‘Jesus’ of someone/some church is not same as ‘Jesus’ of others. It is a figure they carry in their
religious tradition, with the image reconstructed from their ‘belief’ and (mis-)interpretation and
application. It certainly is different from the very historical one to be found in the N.T, the very one
proclaimed and confessed by his follows before being altered in the Hellenistic world of metaphysics
and religions. Competing, yes, often incompatible, incongruous, and contradictory to serve their own
power and ideologies.

All and every argument on God and Jesus and rather hopeless, since none talks same way as others
and same way all the time! We need common ground linguistically with others to hear different
opinions and ideas.

Same is true for the Scripture (cf. Bible) as to the authority of the Scripture. (cf. ‘Sola scriptura’ –
which itself is not biblical expression and is denied by Catholics, who places it not higher than
Church pronouncements and teachings (cf. Papal authority). That’s a gist of ‘religion’.

From (pp.33-36) Michael Goulder, ed. (1979), Incarnation and Myth: The Debate Continued
Jesus and the Meaning of 'God' (Don Cupitt)

2. God
It is convenient to turn next to the word 'God'. Philosophers have discussed whether the word God
is a proper name or a predicable term, but the discussion has been rather trivial, taking little account
of the history of religions. Ideas of God are found in almost all cultures and are of great antiquity
and diversity. It may empirically be the case that most English use of the word God is influenced
by its prehistory in the Latin, Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew languages, but nowadays we cannot
assume that classical and Judea-Christian culture have a prescriptive right to lay down the logic of
the word. The most we can claim is that they are internally wide-ranging enough to cover most of
the ground. With this proviso, I suggest that the word God has five main kinds of use:

G1-A
God may be defined relatively as anything which becomes the object of a religious attitude. In an
extended sense it may be said that a man's god is his belly (Phil. 3.19), but more typically
something is set up or established as the object of a cult. So it is said that the children of Israel
went a-whoring after the Baalim and made Baal-berith their god (Judg. 8.33). The most universal
metaphor, perhaps, is that of exaltation, for when something becomes my god it becomes the object
of my highest concern. G2 'God' may be used as a predictable, or more exactly a sortal term. In
this use it is historically continuous with the use of Elohim and El in Hebrew. There are two main
ideas here:

G2-A
As a sortal term, a God is a being which is a member of the class of divine beings. Gods may differ
greatly in character and in their degree of authority and power, but they are thought of as belonging
to a kind.

106
G2-B
The monotheistic use of 'God' presupposes an intense, exclusive concentration of divinity in a
single focus. Thus, God becomes a title, or descriptive expression with unique reference. In this
use it is equivalent to such standard English expressions as the Deity, the Godhead, the Almighty,
the Lord, the Supreme Being, the Most-High, the Holy One and their equivalents in Hebrew and
other languages.

Some people argue that the use of God as a predicable term has an ampler descriptive content than
these phrases imply and should include such expressions as the Creator of the World. I disagree,
because it can be and has been disputed whether God is the Creator, in a sense in which it cannot
be disputed that God is the Most-High. Incidentally, I have put G2A and G2B together because the
formulation of monotheism ('There is only one God') takes place against a polytheistic background.

G3
A step lower, there are some divinities who are inferior or subordinate divinities, divinities only
by permission. They are felt to have some religious power, but not autonomously. In the Hebrew
Bible members of Yahweh's court, angels and the gods of foreign nations are called gods in this
sense. The various mediating principles and half-personified divine attributes described in the
Bible also belong in this class.

G4
Divinity is communicable to men, and there are a number of senses in which human beings are
called gods, both in the biblical tradition and outside it. His exalted office brings him close to
heaven, so that a king may be thought of as 'God' in so far as he is endowed by virtue of his office
with the fullness of divine power and authority. In the Hebrew Bible the clearest case is Psalm
45.6, but there are also many disputed instances, and other examples range from the Pharaohs to
seventeenth-century European monarchs. A judge exercises a divine function, and in ancient Israel
to go before a judge was to go before God (Ex. 21.6; 22.8, etc.). Power over life and death is divine,
and as modern medicine develops doctors even today may be spoken of as becoming gods or
wielding godlike powers.

In ancient times one who dealt with the deity became suffused with the divine holiness. Something
of the divine glory shone in Moses' face and he had to be veiled (Ex. 34.29-35). Deification, or
participation in God by grace, can be regarded as the general destiny of all God's people, as the
discussion in John 10.33-36 shows. Jesus is seen as the pre-eminent example of this, the one who
is most a son of God.

G5
But against these various extensions of divinity, to other gods, to inferior gods and to men there
stands the final use of God as the proper name of an individual, addressed in the vocative: 'O God',
'Thou God'. Far in the past now lies the use of the proper name Yahweh for the God of Israel. But
the logic of God's proper name is somewhat different from that of other proper names. God is not
thought of as being assigned the Name, but as revealing it. And God reveals the Name, not to the
world at large, but to one particular community. The Name, in short, stands for the religious system
peculiar to one people by which that people identify their God and gain privileged access to their
God. The Name may come to be regarded as a mystery too sacred to be uttered; or, as the faith
becomes more universal in its outreach, it may be dropped. In Christianity there is no proper name
for God, but the system of salvation through which God is identified, the Way, may be summed
up in a phrase like 'the Father of Jesus Christ' or in the traditional threefold Name, 'the Father, the
Son and the Holy Spirit'.

Such are the main uses of the word God, and very complex they are. Their variety can perhaps be
explained in terms of two underlying themes:

First, there is God's relation to worship. A God may be thought of as something postulated by the
practice of worship (G1), as that actual individual who alone deserves worship (G2B), or as one
107
who is alone rightly worshipped by those privileged to receive the revelation of God's true Name
(G5).

Secondly, there is the question of how far and in what ways godhood can be shared, whether
equally (G2A), or in varying degrees (G3), or by communication (G4).

108
‘God question’ – theological and linguistic:

Is the Almighty Creator same as 'God'? No. Even if the term 'Elohim' is used, the answer is No. From the
viewpoint of linguistic issue and the practical observation, any being who is called 'God' is not different
from that one in the expression 'O my G_d' (OMG).

The name of the Almighty Creator in the Scripture is YHWH. However, sadly only a few do consistently
render throughout the 'Old Testament' (in Christian bibles) (→ Hebrew TaNaKh of Judaism). E.g. Jehovah
– ASV, YLT, Darby, RV, NWT. Yahweh – JB.

Most Bibles intentionally replace with no-name descriptors. E.g. - 'the LORD', 'haShem' Literally
'the name'), 'l'Eternal' (French Bibles); Adonai – Fox, CJB.
Even in Exo 6:2 ('I am YHWH'), only a few have the divine name kept in this verse – KJV (but in
only a few places; most other places it is replaced by 'the LORD').

[As to ‘God’ in the Scripture as to be worshiped, it can only belong to the category of ‘person’. God
as someone to be believed is a mighty one, almighty. The Sun is a mightiest one as far as the
biological existence (incl. man) on the earth is concerned. (Cf. the ancient Egyptian sun god ‘Ra’.)
Though personified, it cannot be a god since it is not a person. Mythological gods of Greek, Rome,
and in Hinduism, are nothing more than representation of some attributes and roles. Is ‘God’ real?
God is not a false (concept); but there is abundance of falseness in it as the word is used. Same for
‘Jesus’. Am ‘I’ real? ‘I’, however, cannot be false as it is the very center of I-consciousness. The
same is applicable to any word, term, idea, notion, or concept that to have any meaningful argument
it is only possible within the limit which act of unequivocally and logically clear defining them is
possible. E.g. ‘hell’ is real? ‘Satan’ is real? ‘Heaven’ is real?]

Cf. Definitions – ‘divinity’ ‘divine nature/essence’ ‘deity’ ‘godhood’ ‘god-being’ ‘god

notion’ ‘god reality’.

God confusion and God conflict all begin with the word problem. Everyone, believe or not, has
god/God. But all are different God. No one believes the one and same God, unless under their
religion. It is one of a few most frequent words in the Bible, it demands us to tackle how to use it,
in order for us to communicate meaningfully on the common ground about ‘God’ and all that
follows. In a sense, God is not God. Which God? Unless specified as ‘God of the Scripture’, ‘God
Almighty’, ‘God the Most-High’ (- Hebrew expressions), ‘God of Abraham, …, Moses, …
Yeshua’, the word God is not much different from a pagan god. So, when we hear ‘g-o-d’ or read
‘God’, we have to know at the beginning what God and which God before we can continue on the
subject.

We should distinguish before we can state or discuss anything to do with ‘God’ in three major
categories in our language:

1. Secular – e.g. use it as shamanistic idea, deistic, polytheistic. Often

blurred with any ‘supernatural’ ‘spiritual’ something. It is the one to
whom people ‘bow down’ ‘rubbing hands’ ‘kneel down’ ‘invoke’
‘begging and petitioning’ esp. to fend off ‘evil’ and misfortune, and for
‘blessing’. It is often used in meaningless expletives – O-my-god; g-d
damn; etc.

109
 2. Religiousa – each religion or denomination claim their own ‘God’. E.g.
many Trinitarians have ‘Jesus’ as their God (in addition to two other
Gods – Father and the Holy Ghost); some claims ‘Jesus’ is same as
‘Jehovah’. Keep their thoughts veiled with technical jargons, such as
‘person’, ‘Godhead’, etc.
3. Biblical – often read as if religious term, the Bible is clear that it is the
Creator God, God of Abraham, Isaac, Yaakob, Moses, David, and of
Yeshua. As a translation word, ‘God’ is ambiguous term – who is
referred to is dependent on the context. See elsewhere how IRENT
renders the arthrous Gk ho theos (the God) as 'Elohim'.

So, in the statement ‘we believe God’, are we clear whom we have in mind? How can
we be comfortable and keep ‘our face’ when we praise ‘God’, with the same we often
nonchalantly dishonor in our speech? That is one of the reasons why the God we believe
is not the one and same, the only God. We have same situation with the name ‘Jesus
Christ’. With the correct original name Yeshua Mashiah as in the Bible, it is not possible
to be used in an expletive from the mouth of people, church-goers or not alike.

¶ Let me consider a statement, <I believe God> (or, 'We believe God' 'They believe
God'). For the same matter, even its negative statement <'I don't believe God>, any
meaningful argument is only possible when we agree that there is what we call
'God'/'god' and we should find a common ground what is the (working) definition of the
word ‘god/God’.
Such a statement requires clarification of three interlinked questions - 'what God is',
'which God' and 'who (that) God is'. Then there is an overriding logical and linguistic
question - 'what does it mean by the word 'God/god'. This applies same way the
statement <I have God> (or a god).
The word 'God/god' is an English word of long history to refer to a mighty being beyond
mortal humans that is believed to have control of people, history, and the nature
(universe). It is used to translate Greek theos, Hebrew Elohim or El. It is not a name, but
simply used as a title (to refer to, or to call). Only the context (not simple capitalization
as God or Elohim) tells this word do refer to Elohim the Most-High (Elohim of Israel, of
Abraham, of Isaac, and Yaakob, and of course of Yeshua). In English, 'God' is even used
in curse words, in blasphemous nonchalant disrespectful manner.

a
It also applies non-Christian as well as pseudo-Christian ideas (such as Deism, New Age / spirituality
movements, etc.). What is called God is not the God of the Bible, but rather amorphous undefinable
‘Force’, ‘spirit’, or ‘spirit of a god’ as shown the examples of their expressions such as ‘God is in you’;
‘God and I are one’, ‘We are part of God’ ‘is everywhere and in everything’ (NCV Eph 4:6), ‘God is
the same as man’, etc.]
110
God confusion

God confusion: Cf. '; God ' (problem of the word God)
• Often used as other than a title, God is not a name! The word itself does not refer
to the Almighty Creator in the Bible. The word can be applied to any. However,
Yeshua never used this title for himself; no one in the Gospels called him as such.
When it has become used for him in the history of the Church (Hellenistic,
Constant Catholic, and then Roman Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant Church),
‘Jesus became God’, ‘Jesus is made God’ in the Constantine Roman Christianism
history – a reconstructed figure who is worship as God in the line of the Trinitarian
doctrine. In a sense, the word ‘God’ is as a ‘divine man’. Depending on how one
defines the word, the two opposing claims ‘Jesus is God’ and ‘Jesus is not God’ is,
strangely enough, not contradictory. Note that Jesus figure is that of Church, not of
the Scripture. Even His name in the Scripture is not 'Jesus', but 'Yeshua'.
• ‘He knew God because He was God!’ - a nonsense by Israel Wayne (2014),
Questions Jesus Asks p. 140.
• “A is God; B is God; and C is God. All together there is one God” – a Trinitarian
formula. Why not counted as three Gods, or three gods?
• ‘The name of our God is Jesus” – a nonsense by Mark Driscoll, an evangelical
pastor. What about the name YHWH (or Jehovah in KJV)?
• Pray to God in the name of Jesus→ Jesus is God → Praying to Jesus in the name of
God? → Where is God the Holy Ghost, hearing such prayer, sitting on his/its/her
throne? On the left of the God the Father?
• I am a god; you too (‘possible after death?). The God was once a man. – Mormon
belief.
• If God, why evil?
• God is immortal. Then how did ‘God’ (‘God the Son’) suffer and die on the Cross?
Linguistically God problem is confusion and mix up with ‘generic God’, which is equally applied
to other Gods other than the Creator God – Elohim of the Scripture (OT and NT)

*Divine Analogy

‘problem of religious language’ ‘divine analogy’: Ref.

• www.iep.utm.edu/rel-lang/
http://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/bitstream/handle/10919/48434/Linford_DJ_T_2014.pdf

Evil and the Evidence for God

'Evil' is not something caused by God the Creator; it may be blamed by 'a god-being'
which itself is made by man, while all evil [things] are man's product. See *evil in <Walk
through the Scripture #1 - Words, Words and Words>

111
Problem of God concept
Problem of God concept: (Heb. el – ‘mighty one’)
The Ten Commandments (two divisions) Cf. Mt 22:36-40

(1) Exo 20:2; Deu 5:6 Prologue

(2) Exo 20:3-7; Deu 5:7-11 First Division (Towards Elohim)
(3) Exo 20:8-17; Deu 5:12-21 Second Division (Towards people)

The prologue
Exo 20:2 //Deu 5:6 //Num 15:41
“I am YHWH your Elohim,
who brought you out of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.”
The first division
Exo 20:3 //Deu 5:7
“You shall have no other mighty onesa before me.”
Exo 20:4 //Deu 5:8
“You shall not make to yourself a man-made imageb,
or any likeness of that which is
in heaven above, or on the earth beneath, or in the waters below.”
Exo 20:5-6 //Deu 5:9-10
“You shall not bow down to them nor servec worship them; …”
Exo 20:7 //Deu 5:11
“You shall not take the name of YHWH your Elohim uselessd,
for YHWH will not hold anyone guiltless who take his name useless.”

Problem on existence of God

Problem of existence of God;
quinque viae (Five Ways or Proofs) in Summa Theologica. by Th. Aquinas (13 c.)

Note: Nefarious and nebulous is the word 'God'.

Almost all the writings on 'God' or about 'God' – whether theological, philosophical,
ideological – begin their debates, speculations, and arguments without clear agreed-upon
definition of 'God'. The end result is for their position and propaganda, either 'God exists' (as
a person? – God is a person?!), 'God does not exist', or 'God is dead', or even a claim of 'I am
God/god' (as some cult leaders say). It is there God who is claimed to be dead or who is
claimed to be of no use for them.

a ‘mighty ones’ – ISR; /gods – most; [Here ‘gods’ is not something like Gods of Muslim, Hindi, etc. which correspond to
‘man-made image’ in the next verse.] [Cf. Mt 4:10; 22:37] [Cf. Deu 6:4 //Mk 12:29 in ‘Shema Yisrael’.]
b ‘man-made image’ – ‘a carved image’ – ESV, NET;/an idol – LXX, ISV; /any graven image – KJV; / a graven image

– ASV; /idols; /graven thing – DRB; [Cf. 1Jn 5:21; Acts 17:29]
c ‘serve’ – ISR; /worship – most; [Cf. Jn 4:24]
d ‘take ~ useless’; />> take ~ in vain – most; /x: misuse; /x: idly utter – Darby; /use for evil purpose – GNB; /x: 망령되이

일컫다 – Ko; [Cf. 1Tm 6:1]

112
 In conclusion, the word 'God' in our everyday English (whether religious or nonreligious,
whether capitalized or not) usage has by itself nothing to do with the very Elohim revealed
in the Scripture, except only in the specific context in the form of 'the God'.
Ref. www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2018/06/ontological-argument-for-gods-
existence-a-survey.html

God-talk
God-talk (which is also the root meaning of the word ‘theology’):

Anything we say/talk/write/think/question about God— God loves, we love God, God says,
God wants, God saves, God's will, relationship with God, believe in God, worship God,
pray to God, etc., etc. all these do not make much sense and are unable to give answers and
clear idea, unless we settle first ‘what God is’, ‘who God is’, and then ‘who the God is’.
What God is, in other words, what do we mean by God?
When we say ‘God’ it remains often hidden which God is meant, since the same word is
used in other religions than Judeo-Christianity and even without religious sense. ‘What God
is’ (‘what is meant by God’) and ‘who God is’ cannot be answered unless ‘which God is’
is settled first.

Since all the things written here begins ultimately with God Himself and comes back to Him,
the simple question ‘do you believe in God?’ is found to be a suitable material for discussion
relevant to translation process. Especially so when ‘(the) Elohim’ instead of ‘God’ is used
as a translation word for IRENT to render it in most occurrences in the Greek New
Testament. [Cf. A question which should follow is ‘Why do you believe in God?’]

For some, the answer to it is straightforward – yes or no.

For some, the answer is difficult to come out, hesitant, reluctant, equivocal (with ‘may be’),
or defensive (‘why asking’).

Fact #1 – God, god, and GOD all same in spoken English. The word God, a God, and a god
– all come out similar to spoken English unless the indefinite article is stressed.

Fact #2 – God is not a name but is used as a title; a word from Teutonic language (for
indigenous religious vocabulary) used to translate the Scripture – as naturally it is to be.
Different languages adopt different word for it (Cf. ‘Allah’ for Christian Bible in Malaysia,
in legal challenge from Muslims.) This in turn would change the sense of the word in the
vernacular language, once it is into wide and lasting use.

Fact #3 – The word God or equivalent to other languages means different to different [groups
of] people. It refers to different object of their worshiping. Such is the case that it is
comfortably used in interfaith dialogue or in public prayer in a group of people of different
faiths.

Fact #4 – Most have difficulty of fully understanding what the verbal phrase ‘believe’ or
‘believe in’ means, affected by syncretic process absorbing ideas from their indigenous
religions, even shamanism.

113
 Fact #5 – No name of the God they believe exists, other than in Judeo-Christian faiths, in
which it is revealed by the very God Himself. However, as the Name is not used out of
reverence, the word ‘God’ becomes divorced from liturgy and language of the churches, as
it becomes uncomfortable to use.

Thus, we have to take a careful look at this word God, a title, and the very Name YHWH –
how they are used in our language within and outside the Church setting. This word will stay
in everyday English and is not going to change even over a long period time as the language
itself will undergo. At the same time, it is felt that the translators of the Scripture should look
into the use of the word in the Greek text and how linguistic problems lie under doctrinal
and theological contentions, since ‘God’ and ‘god’ are not fundamentally different beasts
but simply used differently.

There are two divine titles most often associated with the names. (These are NOT names.)
Heb. Elohim (pl.) Gk. theos (‘Elohim’ = ‘the God’; vs. ‘God’)
Heb. Adonai (pl.); Gk. kurios (‘Adonai’, ‘LORD’)

[Cf. Adon (singl.);

These epithets reflect or describe God’s attribute:

• Heb. Ruaḥ HaKodesh; Gk. to pneuma to hagion (the Holy spirit) [Cf. ‘the holy spirit’]
• Heb. El Shaddai; Gk. ho theos ho pantokratōr (God the Almighty). (cf. Gk. despota -
Gen 15:2 LXX. – in the sense of ‘the Supreme’)
• ‘Elohim the Most-High’a (not ‘Most-High Elohim’ of Hebrew expression. Gen 14:20
el elyon; LXX ho theos ho hupsistos).

[See also the titles ‘Son of God’ ‘Mashiah (> Messiah); /Christ’ under * Yeshua.]

Our Saviorb is a descriptive title applied to both Elohim and his Mashiah. [‘Yeshua’ name,
a short form of Yehoshua which means ‘YHWH is salvation’; thus, Yeshua is salvation – of
YHWH’s salvation.] The same Gk. word, but difference sense for Elohim and for Yeshua.

‘Yeshua Mashiah our Savior’ (Tit 3:6); ‘our Savior, Yeshua Mashiah’ (2Ti 1:10); ‘the Savior,
Lord Yeshua Mashiah’ (Phi 3:20)] [Cf. ‘My Savior, My God’ – My Savior = Yeshua, Incarnate
Word of Elohim (Jn 1:14) and My God = Elohim YHWH. Cf. https://youtu.be/96P0bwvpbk4 ]

‘of Elohim our Deliverer ░░ [tou sōtēros hēmōn theou – in genitive with * remote definite
article – x4 in 1Ti 2:3; Tit 1:3; 2:10; 3:4) /of God our Savior – most; /of our Savior, God –
NWT; /of God our Deliverer – JNT]
[‘the living Elohim who is the Savior’ – 1Ti 4:10]
[‘alone to Elohim our Deliverer through Yeshua Mashiah’ – Jud 1:25]
[There is no expression ‘our Savior God’ appears in the English bible translations.]

Immanuel (Gk. Emmanuel) (Mt 1:28) – not a 'name' but 'title' or 'descriptor' – 'Elohim with us' –
"(yoů people) shall call his name" (for his son born of maiden) in Isa 7:14. A typical Matthean
pesher for "presence of YHWH Elohim in the person of Yeshua" → a proof text for 'virgin birth

a
‘of Elohim, the Most-High’ – tou theou tou upsistou – not ‘most high God’ [e.g. KJV: /x: ‘the most high
God’ – Mk 5:7; Act 16:17; Heb 7:1. /x: the Highest – Lk 1:32, 35, 76; 6:35); /> the most High – Act 7:48;
Lk 8:28]
b
‘savior’ – a religious lingo. ‘Is Jesus the only savior?’ – what does it mean by ‘savior’? Say someone is the
savor, what does it mean?
114
 of Jesus', a typical Church pesher/midrash to fuse with the trinitarian doctrine of 'God = Jesus' or
'Jesus is God'.

[call the name of -- H7121 qara ('call') + H8034 shem ('name') -- Gen 17:19; 22:14;
25:25; 26:21; Isa 7:14, etc.]

[That a same title is applied to both does not mean that both are one and same person. An
illogical claim of “Jesus = Jehovah”, the one and same person – (e.g. in Mormonism)] (Cf.
‘Jesusism’)

Creator vs. Maker (the one who makes) – QQ to check OT for the word – NET overuses
‘Creator).

Ecc 12:1;
Isa 17:7; 40:28; 42:5; 43:1; 45:9; 45:18; Amo 4:13;
Gen 14:19; 14:22; Deu 32:6;
Job 4:17; 32:22; 35:10; 36:3;
Psa 95:6; 115:15; 121:2; 124:8; 134:3; 149:2;
Pro 14:31; 17:5; 22:2 (who made); Hab 2:18;

Rm 1:25 (the One who created); 1Pe 4:19 (Creator kristēs); Mt 19:4 (the One who
made)

The names and titles should not be confused with descriptive phrases or labels, as often
shown up among hocus-pocus and mumbo-jumbo in theological arguments and writings.

*God, *god; *gods; deity; idols; graven images

God problem; ‘God’ ‘believing God’ God – what is God? Which God? Whose God? What is the
name? What does it mean that God has a name?

'God' is divine, but that someone divine does not necessarily mean that one is 'God'. Someone's
divineness vs. divinity vs. 'divine essence' vs. 'divine nature'; deity vs. 'divine being' 'divine person' 'a
divine man'.

Atheism, Antitheism; Agnosticism; pantheism; /Panentheism ; deism; finite god-ism, monotheism,

/Monolatry vs /Henotheism ; polytheism; Trinitarianism; /Binitarianism ;

[Note: the terms theology and Christology – (1) study of God/Christ; (2) doctrines of God/Christ.
Note also that all doctrines are products of human mind to be used for their own goals. When they
say ‘biblical doctrines’, they are nothing more than church doctrines which are based on their
interpretation of the proof texts.

115
 [In many cases, the word ‘God’ is actually used in the sense of God-being without specifically
referencing to and identifying the one true God, Elohim of the Scripture.

E.g. from. http://3l8hvo31a7yc2inkkn1eprjd.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-

content/uploads/sites/7/2014/05/HowCanWeKnowTheChristianGodIsTheOneTrueGod-
Transcript.pdf
• “Every religion has a different view of God.’’
Here ‘God’ is not YHWH Elohim, the Almighty God, whom Yeshua called ‘Father’.

• “Though there are often similarities between these views, the common ground is
merely superficial. There are fundamental differences that make each religion
distinct and irreconcilable. Logically, contradictory claims cannot all be true,
either one view of God is true or all of them are false” –
Here again the statement is incorrect, as both views can be true on their own, since God in both
positions does not have same meaning and reference.]

Phony God

/demiurge : ('artisan' or 'craftsman') – dēmiourgós (dēmioergós)

demiourgós tou kosmou – Plato (ca 360 BC).
'Gnostic demiurge'
God-man, demigod – 'Jesus' is claimed to be so, not simply (truly? merely?) man
(a man?).

False god (idol)

Elohim: ‘Mighty God’ vs. ‘Almighty God’

The Hebrew word ‘Elohim’ (which takes singular verbs and singular pronoun 'he', and
is capitalized]a) in the Scripture is almost exclusively used in reference to YHWH (→
Cf. ‘Elohim’; ‘Elohim’).

As to the corresponding Gk. theos. it is arthrous (e.g. ho theos), it is more than ‘God’
as in English convention (with capitalization), it means ‘the God’. IRENT renders ho
theos as ‘Elohim’ (for YHWH) and anarthrous theos as 'Elohim', except when the word
refers to a god-being other than YHWH (usually anarthrous) (e.g. a pagan deity), it is
variously rendered in IRENT, e.g. → ‘a god’, ‘a God-being’, ‘a God’, ‘what God-being
is’, or ‘God’. [Note: genitive case 'theou' –'of God' or 'God's'] [See elsewhere ' * remote
definite article']
Jn 10:34 ~~ yoů [judges] are [to rule] as gods ░░ (‘gods’ in the sense of ‘mighty God-
like ones’ = Heb. elohim) [referring to judges and administrators Israel, not people of
Israel <sons (children – KJV) of YHWH yoůr Elohim ← Deu 14:1).] {Psa 82:6} /=
you judges are like gods; /~ as god-like beings – ARJ; />> you are gods – most; /you
are elohim – ISR; /xx: you are Elohim – JNT; /> you people are gods – AUV;

a
Cf. 'elohim' (uncap); El, etc.
116
[Psa 82:1 – [A psalm of Asaf:] Elohim (=God) stands in the divine assembly; there with
elohim (gods = referring to the judges), He judges. 82:6 I, I said yoů are elohim and
sons of the Most-High, all of yoů.]
Psa 82 Judges act as God – (subtitled in LXX Apostolic Interlinear) (Cf. Isa 41:23 ‘we
may know yoů are gods’;
[Cf. Exo 7:1 ‘I have you to come as elohim to Pharaoh’ – ARJ; /like God – NET, ESV,
NRSV, HCSB, NIV trio; /God – NWT; /as God – NASB, NKJV; /as God – AMP; /an
elohim – ISR; /a god – KJV+; /seem like God – NLT; /have put you in the place of God
– CJB; /have put you in the role of God – ISV]

117
Mighty God; almighty God

The expression ‘mighty God’ is applied both to YHWH and to other; whereas
‘almighty’ is only to YHWH.

(1) Isa 9:6 “Wonderful Counselor (Gk. thaumastos sumboulos), Mighty El (> Mighty
God'; LXX theos ischuros; Heb. el gibbor – not elohim), Everlasting Father (patēr tou
mellontos), Prince of Peace (eksousiastēs archōn eirēnēs).” (Capitalization in English
is for use as in a title – here ‘God’ = ‘god’, not ‘Elohim’)

(2) to YHWH:
• ‘the mighty God Isa 10:21 = YHWH, the Holy One of Israel (v. 20).
• ‘Adonai YHWH’ (> Lord Yahweh – WEB; /x: Lord GOD – KJV; /xx:
Sovereign LORD – NET, NIV; /Adonai God - CJB); Jer 32:17 → v. 18 the
great and mighty God (el gibbor), YHWH of Hosts is His name.

[gibbor H1368 (mighty); kabbir H3524 (mighty); shadday H770 (almighty)

el H410 (God, god); elohim H430 (God, gods); eloah H433 (god) (Deu 32:15 etc.;
[Note: 'god' = a 'god-being'.]

‘The Almighty’ or ‘the Almighty God’ – is applied only to YHWH.

• El Shaddai (God Almighty) Gen 17:1 etc. [LXX simply as theos]
• ‘YHWH of host’ /x: the LORD Almighty – NIV - Zec 1:3, Jer 32:18, Isa 6:3 etc.;
/Adonai-Tzva’ot – CJB; /Jehovah of armies – NWT;
• YHWH Elohim of the host – Amo 6:14
• [H6635 tsaba 'army']
[?? ‘YHWH Adonai’]
‘YHWH Elohim’ (?? ‘Elohim YHWH)]
2Co 6:18 Kurios Pantokratōr Adonai the Almighty (the Lord Almighty) /Adonai-Tzva’ot – JNT;
Rev 4:8 etc. Kurios ho Theos Pantokratōr Adonai Elohim the Almighty
Being called ‘mighty God’ – does it mean to possess divine nature? – what is ‘divine nature’? In
addition to other nature or in lieu of it?

*Elohim the Most-High’ (ho theos ho hupsistos); this expression makes him the very God of the
Scripture. This is what is translated uniformly as ‘Elohim’ in IRENT of the arthrous Gk. ho theos
(the God), in contrast to what has been inadequately conveyed by translating it as ‘God’.
[Capitalized as it is taken as a title of God.]

In NT: Mk 5:7; Lk 8:28; Act 16:17; Heb 7:1; /> God the Most-High; > the Most-High God; /x:
the Highest God; /x: God the Highest;

Sometimes simply ‘the Most-High’:

Mk 5:7; Lk 1:32, 35, 76; 6:35; Lk 8:28; Act 7:48; 16:17; Heb 7:1;

118
Gk. theos ('God') vs. ho theos ('*the God'): How to Translate

The Gk. ho theos ('the God') pertains to 'who God is', and IRENT renders it as 'Elohim';
the Gk. theos ('God') pertains to 'what God is' and is rendered as 'God', occasionally as
'what God is' or 'God-being' [or 'a god' for pagan deities]. [On the plural word ‘gods’,
see EE here. 4] Literarily and exegetically this removes any cause of confusion,
conflicts and contradictions over 'God' problem and confusion.
Ref. www.tdgordon.net/theology_2/anarthrous_theos.pdf

Most English bible translations do not distinguish and renders as 'God' throughout (and
only few places as 'a god'). Only a few translations have them differentiated as 'the God'
and 'God'. A few have 'Elohim' to translate 'the God', but it is seen used for both arthrous
and anarthrous.
• A notable one is Mark Heber Miller (2007), The Nazarene Commentary.
www.nazarene-friends.org/nazcomm/ It renders ho theos as 'The God'
(both 'The' and 'God' capitalized throughout!) [with a few places as 'God',
and one place as 'the god' 2Co 4:4] and theos as 'God' [with a few places
as 'The God' and 'divine' (Jn 1:1c)].
• Theos as 'Elohim'; with ho theos as Yahweh - The Sacred Scripture, Bethel Ed.
1981
• Both as 'Elohim' – ISR; http://hebrewbible.co/HebraicRootsBible.pdf

As long as the English word is used as it has been – not necessarily connected to the God of the
Scripture, it would not only fail to bring up to us the true picture of what the word is being used
in the Scripture but also let us led astray from the truth – the divine reality and fall into man-
made language – doctrine, philosophy, and theology – most of them irrelevant and often contrary
to what the Scripture reveals the Word of God. The word of pagan origin ‘God’ is awfully
inadequate to translate Gk. ho theos. It is not a matter of restoring Hebrew root of the whole
Scripture, but to adequately and clearly express into a vernacular language, the word of Hebrew
origin, Elohim is the best choice for the English Bible translations, unshackled from the religious
and church traditions. [For the case in other languages than English, see Appendix: theory,
principle, practice and problem of translation and translations.] [On the question ‘do you believe
in God’, see Appendix.]

119
 The arthrous Greek ho theos (‘the God’) are found to refer solely to the God (i.e. YHWH
Elohim) and is rendered as Elohim (a Hebrew word) in IRENT. This is one of the
distinguishing features of IRENT from most other English bibles. The capitalized ‘God’
cannot distinguish itself from God of generic notion (What God is; God, a God, a god, etc.)]

IRENT keeps ‘God’ as the translation word only for the anarthrous noun theos, which is in
the sense of God-being and appears in wide usage in the Scripture. Such anarthrous
countable nouns are often in descriptive adjectival sense (as non-countable noun) to denote quality,
not the identity.] Note: most of anarthrous are other than nominative as genitive (‘God’s) or
in prepositional phrase, e.g. ‘from God’.

Once this principle of rendering in reference to 'God' is applied to the whole of NT it can be
seen that exegetical controversy is easily cleared up (where the Trinitarians find their proof
text in some cases), as shown in the following translation comparison:

IRENT Most others NWT

Jn 1:1b Elohim God God
Jn 1:1c what God is God a god
Jn 20:28a my Master and my Elohim My Lord and my God!
Heb 1:8 'your throne is of Elohim' Your throne, O God God is your throne
Other examples:

2Co 4:4 Elohim as for this age the god of this age/world the god of this system of
things
the appearing of the glory the appearing of glory of our glorious manifestation of the
of great Elohim and great God and Savior, J.C. great God and our Savior, J.C.
Tit 2:13 appearing of Savior, J.C.

Just as the Hebrew word elohim itself is used in several different senses (singular as well as
plural) so is with Gk. word theos and English word God/god – even applied to pagan gods.
When we see the word ‘a god’ in the Bible text, it connotes one of many gods, pagan. [NWT
translation of Jn 1:1c, claimed as ‘grammatical’, is unacceptable in the way the word is used
in common English.]

Without His Name, even forgetting the name itself, and confusing Most-High Elohim I not
distinguished from generic God of all sorts of beliefs – religion, denomination, sects, and
cults (esp. deism and pantheism). On the other hand, to treat the very Name of Most-High
Elohim in vain and in a frivolous manner, written or spoken, is the first-degree blasphemy –
as if it’ is a magical, mysterious, ‘sacred’ mantra to be used to invoke a god.

****

a
In Jn 20:28 it is nominative, used as vocative, but not vocative of calling, but vocative of exclamation.
Thomas was not saying Yeshua, the risen Lord, who appeared, is ‘the God of him’. This is unthinkable in
the Hebrew mind set; all those were Yehudim, devout to Elohim of Abraham, Isaac, and Yaakob. His
exclamation ‘my Master’ and ‘my Elohim’ – he was not giving out theologically profound un-biblical
inspiration. Of course, beyond tri-theistic Trinitarians, often we hear someone state that ‘name of our God
is Jesus’ or ‘Jesus is (same) Jehovah’, etc.
120
 The English word ‘god’ or ‘*God’, which is simply a common nonspecific noun (for any God-
being, a mighty ‘supernatural’ one), does make any difference whether capitalized or not. They are
not distinguishable when read aloud.a

Philosophically and religiously ‘God’ has become a means to an end for human desires – prosperity,
happiness, wealth, pride, and power by the new crop of satanic deceivers - God-peddlersb in modern
Christianized America.]

It is etymologically from a Teutonic language with a nonspecific sense of a ‘mighty supernatural

being’, a generic notion of a deity (same also the Greek word theos and Hebrew word elohim) in
once pagan society. It is used in variety of manner, from a vulgar or curse expression (OMG; G_d
damn) to the philosophical and theological writings as well as church language intoned with
‘holiness’. Though the English convention with God vs. god allows us to use each in a different
sense, linguistically speaking such arbitrary scheme does not work in everyday speech. Though the
context gives a clue, the image people have is not what the Scripture has. Matter of fact, it is not a
question of ‘believe God or not’, it is ‘believe which God’. Everyone has ‘God’ – What is God and
Which God? What matters is, whether it is ‘the God of the Scripture’ (Elohim) or ‘God of the
world’. The God of the world comes in various forms – from a craved image or a natural object
(tree, mountain, Sun, Moon, star) to an abstract idea such as money, power, Force. Ultimately
though, it is one’s own self which is one’s God. We human beings are ‘theists’ one way or the other,
whether they say ‘I believe’ or ‘I don’t believe’.

Neither the biblical phrase ‘God the Father’ itself is God’s name, but a title

• God our Father: Gal 1:3; Col 1:3; 2Th 1:2 (God our Father; /x: God the Father – NWT3)
• Elohim, even Father: Col 3:17 v.l; Eph 5:20; Jam 1:27
• God, even Father – 1Co 15:24
• the Father ~ Elohim - ho patēr (v.) ho theos. Joh_6:27;
• God the Father - Eph 6:23; Phi 2:11; 1Th 1:1; 2Ti 1:2; Tit 1:4; 1Pe 1:2; 2Pe 1:17; 2Jn 1:3;
Jud 1:1; 1Pe 1:2;

Since the word God itself does not say about the reality (of Who He is), this common word of
generic notion tends to make people bring their syncretistic idea into the Biblical text. The inevitable
result is contamination of doctrines and liturgical practices which have all the subtle characteristics
of syncretism, which infuses Hellenistic (Greek) philosophy into the Scripture of the Hebrew
mindset. It leads people to project their own God into the Bible. Their God – even God of the ‘Bible’
(God of Church, God of religion, or God of their faith) – is not same as Elohim, the very God of the
Scripture. In other words, man creates in his own image a God whom he can control. This is a
perversion of what the Scripture tells of ‘Elohim who created man in God’s image’. Even some has
‘God is dead’. 5 God is not the name, but a title for someone or something people regard as a mighty
one – more powerful than mere mortals. It is applied to things (graven images), ideologies, or some
human persons in common usage of the word in English apart from a translated word in the Bible.
There is no one who has no God to believe. Simply they do not know they believe – the universal
god for anyone is one’s own self. [‘you all will be like gods, knowing right and wrong (on your

a
Even with the initial letter in capital, the word itself fails to come to the readers’ mind distinct from the
undefined ‘God’ of generic notion, yes, even read in the Bible; even fails to bring the context undistorted.
b
God-peddlers in modern degenerate Christianized America is another assault from Satan. The ‘God’ has
nothing to do with the Bible, the Scripture, and Elohim. [Houston preacher Joel Osteen is the prime
provocateur of a seductive brand of Christianity that reduces God to a means to our ends. He transposes the
glory of the Cross to the glory of consumerism – making it a fast-food Christianity that’s long on looks but
dreadfully short on substance, leaving you naked, gullible to the devil’s schemes. Ref. Hank Hanegraaff. The
OSTEENification of American Christianity. Cf. OPRAHization of Christians.]
121
 own, apart from Elohim)’ (esesthe ōs theoi – Gen 3:5 LXX)]. When many deny and go against God,
it is Elohim (the God) of the Scripture.

With this word ‘God’ used a translation word in the Greek New Testament for Greek word theos,
which is a translation word in the TaNaKh (‘Hebrew Scripture’, ‘Old Testament’) for Hebrew word
Elohim, most English Bibles fail to bring what the Scripture declares in which the Creator is not a
God, nor just ‘God’; as God-being not a ‘person’. Only in His revealing of who He is, He comes to
as a person-in-relation – which is in the person of Yeshua Mashiah. The English word ‘God’ by
itself is a common noun – it is not a name but a referent. To use it as a title equivalent to the Biblical
word ‘Elohim’ is to be on a slippery slope eventually into total disconnection from the Scripture
which then finds oneself transplant into the religions with the Bible as an instruction manual and an
application book with lists of absurd regulations and mantras.

As the way the word ‘God’ is used in English either for a title or for a referent, linguistically and
Scripturally one can say, “YHWH is not a God, nor God”. As the word God is of a pagan origin,
the statement ‘YHWH is God’ is nonsensical. Yes, YHWH is the true ‘God’ of the Scripture, with
God in the sense of God-being. He is YHWH Elohim, with the Hebrew word Elohim as His title,
and should not mix up with ‘God’.

Such is the problem in using the word ‘God’ as a translation word for English Bible, in that there is
no linguistic differentiation between the God of the Scripture and the God which originated
ultimately out of human spirt and thought. When someone says ‘I believe in God’, such a statement
has actually no meaning when it is spoken out of the context, since anything or any person can be
designated as ‘God’, a God out of many. The true people of the Book believe in YHWH, believe
Him as the true God, and as only God they believe in. To make a statement ‘believe in God’ is
useless as nebulous as it can be. Without ‘knowing’ the Name, everything we say about God is just
nebulous and powerless.6

[Cf. The current legal contention for the permissibility of use of ‘Allah’ as the translation word
(equivalent to God) in Christian Arabic Christian Bibles in Malaysia. The usage of the word is such
that it seems more that a title for Muslims.]

The pagan word ‘god’ was taken over into Biblical English word as diverse world languages would
do from their indigenous (‘pagan’) religious vocabulary. It is similar in the case of Hebrew words,
El and Elohim (pl.). Main difference is that with Elohim none of other gods is addressed; whereas
English ‘God’ is associated with other than the Creator and is indiscriminate used in secular or
pagan context. This serves a rationale for IRENT in adopting the Hebrew word Elohim as the
translation (loan) word for the arthrous Greek ho theos.

122
 We have to realize that ‘God’ as a translation word fails to help the readers from confusion
in understanding the Scripture and from exegetical contradiction and doctrinal conflict. In
addition to the most important example Jn 1:1,a another example note-worthy to mention:
E.g. it is 'the God is love', not ‘God is love’b as commonly translated (1Jn 4:8, 16). The text
does not tell about ‘God’, as if a generic God in or outside some religions, but the very God,
YHWH, to whom Yeshua is the only Son.] As we have no way to alter how language works,
hoping to reserve this word only for specific meaning and in religious usage [e.g. ‘God!’,
‘OMG’, etc.], it is impossible to represent the true God, Elohim of the Scripture, as long as
this word of a pagan-origin is used to translate the Hebrew equivalent, Elohim.

In the Greek NT, the word theos is mostly arthrous (especially in nominative case), i.e., ho
theos ‘the God’ which is focused on 'who God is' and emphatically points to the very God
– YHWH Elohim. On the other hand, anarthrous theos (often in genitive case) 'God' is
focused 'on what God is'. [cf. ‘God-image’ or ‘the image of God’] Unfortunately, English
convention does not use the definite article, unless it is modified by an adjectival phrase
(i.e. the true God etc.). The Greek article has semantic force in-between ‘the’ and ‘that’
and is much more than ‘the’ in English.

There is no better way than to take the Hebrew word ‘Elohim’c as the translation word for
ho theos in GNT to make to carry clear sense in the translated text. Only a few translations
have it as 'the God'. [E.g. as 'The God' in Nazarene Commentary (Mark Heber Miller, 2007
www.nazarene-friends.org/nazcomm/ )]

arthrous 'ho theos' (the God)-

[Need consolidate material of the same subject.]

‘Elohim’ or ‘God’

ppp
Arthrous dative 'to Elohim', 1Ti 1:17 (with a remote definite article)
"Tō de basilei tōn aiōnōn, aphthartō, aoratō, monō [sophō] Theō"

In majority cases Gk. theos occurs as arthrous as ‘ho theos’ (‘the God’) and refers to the very
God of the Scripture, YHWHd Himself. In English the word capitalized God is exclusively
for the setting of monotheistic religions. However, such a typographic convention does not

a
‘what God is’: In Jn 1:1c as nominative but adjectival. In Jn 1:18; 1Jn 4:12; 2Jn 9 as accusative. Cf. Problem
of anarthrous noun as adjectival – Jn 4:24 (‘as spirit is’ or ‘what spirit is’), 1Jn 4:8 (‘love’ vs. ‘what love is’).
b
‘God is love’: [‘No one can love God, only because God is love.’]
In Jn 1:1c as nominative but adjectival. In Jn 1:18; 1Jn 4:12; 2Jn 9 as accusative. Cf. Problem of anarthrous
noun as adjectival – Jn 4:24 (‘as spirit is’ or ‘what spirit is’), 1Jn 4:8 (‘love’ vs. ‘what love is’).
c
[The case is similar to use of Hebrew word ‘Adonai’ instead of Lord (or even LORD) when it refers to
YHWH Elohim.]
d
YHWH = ‘Elohim of Abraham, Elohim of Yitzchak, Elohim of Yaakob’ (Mt 22:32), not ‘God of Abraham,
God of Isaac, God of Jacob’.
123
 really help make it distinct from other gods or God of other religions. The capitalized 'God'
does not by itself come differently from ‘god’, the fact being obvious when it is read aloud.
Moreover, in English convention it does not take the definite article (except when it needs
to be specific with an additional qualifying descriptive). [This linguistic literary translation
principle should be scrupulously adhered in IRENT, thereby doctrinal noises over the word
and the concept ‘God’ can be entirely bypassed without being bogged down in the Trinitarian
as well as anti-Trinitarian hardened mindsets. [Esp. Heb 1:8 and Jn 20:28 (nominative
arthrous ho theos) – refers to Father (YHWH Elohim), not Yeshua.]

The best option to translate this Greek phrase is the corresponding Hebrew word ‘Elohim’a.
(‫)אלהים‬. This choice is eminently suitable as it has precise sense and clear reference to the
true God.
When the article is present to particularize the generic concept of God, it is rendered as ‘God-
being’. E.g. Rm 1:23 ‘the immortal God-being’ rather than ‘the incorruptible God (KJV)’
‘the immortal God (ESV)’, or even ‘the immortal Elohim’.
[Check EE here 7 for what bearing this consistent approach of translation has bearing on exegetical issue
on the two special places.]
[Check EE here 8 for implication for the special case of Korean Bible translation.

The word ‘God’ is not a name but an appellation used as a title. The basic sense is ‘mighty
one’. The common expression ‘one believes (in) God’ actually does not mean much by itself
unless it is made clear of what is meant when we say ‘God’ and what is meant by ‘believe’.
“Everyone has a God”, but ‘not everyone believes a God’b

When it is rendered as ‘God’ is used in a Bible for the translation word throughout as is the
case of most English Bibles, we should not to recognize a subtle but serious side effect. The
linguistic effect is not well appreciated. From reading such a Bible most people will get a
word picture of a generic universal God-being, even of a metaphysical notion of Greek
philosophy, as prevalent and natural in modern Western mindset. Not only within the
Christian religions and liturgy, but also seen in every day speech of common man. Usually
they are totally unaware of such and being mostly subconscious, it is almost impossible to
prevent it from affecting the readers.
Thus, people are ultimately disconnected from (1) the true God, (2) from OT and YHWH
worship (Judaism), (3) from the Creation down through the history of Israel. Its influence is
well shown in history full of spirit of antinomianism, anti-Judaism, and anti-Semitism in the
traditions and practices of various Christian. The result is burgeoning of a variety of religions
off the Constantine Roman Christianism, producing uncountable number of Christian and
pseudo-Christian movements, sects, and denominations. They carry ‘Jesus’ in their own
fashionable images created after human whim and fancy to entice people to choose from a
smorgasbord of different ‘GEEzus’c.

a
When the word is emphatic in context (e.g. 1Jn 4:8, 16), it is possible to phrase it as ‘the very Elohim’. It is
not ‘God is love’, but ‘the very Elohim is love’.
b
Atheism with the ‘Self’ as one’s own God-being: Though who claims they don’t believe God, it only means
that they don’t believe in a particular God, while what they actually believe in is ‘oneself’ which is a God on
their own. Cf. Gen 3:5 “… you will be like Elohim” – (Heb. elohim, gods or God); /like God – most; /x: as gods
– KJV; /x: live divine beings - NET.
c
‘Jesus’ vs. ‘Zeus’ – originally Iesus (as in KJV 1611) before the sound value of j came into English. The terminal s is a
postfix for the Greek masculine nominative case. It has nothing related to ‘Zeus’ as some tries to discredit the name in the
current English.
124
 Here is a list of benefits to argue for using this Hebrew word as a word of choice to be used
in a faithfula translation:
– (1) the word ‘Elohim’ is known even among those outside Judaic tradition;
– (2) it is easy to pronounce and in consistent spelling in transliteration, unlike many Hebrew
words;
– (3) it reconnects the readers to the Creator God in OT and in the history of Israel;
– (4) it expels any association with the image of a westernized God such as in Deistic thinking;
and importantly
– (5) it makes the words be expressed so that the readers see them in clear and precise sense as
the text tells in the context. b
The goal is to reconnect the New Testament to the TaNaKh (Old Testament) and reconnect
the Renewed Covenant in Yeshua Mashiah to its original Hebraic root of Covenant of
YHWH, linguistically and spiritually, thus disconnecting ourselves culturally from
Christianity which is distorted and buried in various Christian religions in their
contradictions, conflicts, and confusions. This has necessitated to re-examine the words,
expressions and terms to move out of Church language which had no other way than to
borrow from those of pagan origin. Disconnecting from such and then restoring those truly
carrying the Scriptural sense so that new a stream of doctrinal and theological understanding
is able to flow out – this time, always bound to the Scripture and remains within the Scriptural
language sans man’s distorted and deceiving language. Only with the power of words in
untainted language [God’s precious gift to human made in His image], it is possible to get
back to from where all came to hear God’s Word revealed in the Scripture. Such is the power
of words – to let live or let die. And all along we have seen the enemy and it is in us and with
us and is us.

[arthrous genitive: ‘of Elohim’. c [Cf. anarthrous – God's]

e.g. ‘the word of Elohim’ – Lk 5:1; 8:11, 21; 11:28; Jn 10:35; Act 4:1; 6:2, 7; 8:14, etc.; ‘the Word of
Elohim’ – Rev 19:13;
Cf. ‘the messenger (angel) of Adonai’, not ‘angel of God’ ‘divine angel’ in NT]

a
faithful is to be a translation: To be faithful (1) a translation work has to make it possible for the readers to recover the
underlying Greek word, phrase, syntax and style, without undue difficulty, and (2) it has to be uncontaminated by words,
phrases, expressions, and idioms which are alien and foreign to what the Scripture is (including doctrinal as well as
personal). Among the plethora of modern translations being published, it is simply impossible to find them faithful,
especially with those in paraphrasing (e.g. NRSV, NLT, GNB, etc.) or free-style rewriting (Message, ERV, CEV, LB,
etc.). Note: every translation claims to be ‘accurate’ so that the word ‘accuracy’ has become meaningless – unless qualified
and explained why and how so.
b
E.g. Jn 1:1b-c, ‘the Logos was with Elohim and what God is, the Logos was’. Compare with the traditional
rendering ‘the Word was with God and the Word was God’. The same word in different sense and referent
makes such translation linguistically unacceptable as it serves as the source of confusion and contradiction.
c
Cf. Genitive of source: e.g. 'Good-News from Elohim' (Rm 15:16; 2Co 11:7; 1Th 2:2, 8, 9; 1Pe 4:17); ‘the
Gospel for Elohim’ (instead of ‘the gospel of God’). Cf. Rm 1:1 (‘God’s Good-News').
125
anarthrous theos in NT:

“someone/something – a mighty one like god” (circular but acceptable definition) =

‘a god’ ‘a god-being’ = 'someone as God'

• non-capitalized for (2) human beings (cf. God’s sons); (2) angels; (3) pagan
gods,
• capitalized (‘God-being’ ‘God’ referring to those entities with divine (God’s)
character.

The anarthrous (without the article) use of theos, in its various cases, is perfectly common
in the Greek New Testament as a designation for ‘God’. There are 255 occurrences total (19
nominatives, 169 genitives, 36 datives, 31 accusatives). The list below is found in Ref.
www.tdgordon.net/theology_2/anarthrous_theos.pdf (a copy is found in IRENT III.
Supplement - Collections#3 – “Collected articles on Jesus became God”.)

Cf. Acts 17:23 (dative – <To an Unknown God-Being>); Acts 28:6 (accu. - a god);
2Th 2:4 (a god-being in place of 'Elohim' – cf. ‘Elohim’)

Nominative case (18x)

Mk 12:27; Lk 20:38; Jn 1:1c, 18; 8:54; Rm 8:33; 1Co 8:4, 6; 2Co 5:19; Gal 2:6;
6:7; Eph 4:6; Phi 2:13; 2Th 2:4 (2x), 16; 1Tm 2:5; 1Pe 5:5; Rev 21:7;
Rm 9:5;

Genitive case (169x)

E.g. genitive theou is rendered as God's instead of 'of God': [Cf. English adjective 'divine' is
not similar to 'of God'] Lk 3:2 (utterance); Rm 3:5 (righteousness); Rm 8:9 (spirit); 15:7 (glory);
8, (trustfulness); 32 (will); 1Co 3:16 (divine habitation); 11:7 (image and glory); 2Co 1:12
(grace); 8:5 (will), 1Th 2:13b (word). huioi or tekna theou, Mt 5:9, Rm 8:14, 16, Gal 3:26, Phi
2:15, 1Jn 3:1, 2 (where these governing nouns also are without the article). [e.g. God’s spirit
(Mt 12:28); God’s son (Mt 14:33);God’s son(s), God’s spirit, God’s throne, God’s grace, God’s
finger ; God’s utterance (Lk 3:2; Eph 6:17); Godʹs children’ (1Jn 3:1, 2); ‘all God’s angels’
(Heb 1:6) [cf. the spirit of Elohim Mt 3:16; cf. Sprit of YHWH – Lk 4:18.] [Cf. Eph 5:5 (tou
Christou kai theou) 'of the Mashiah and of Elohim an article governs both nouns. 2Co 1:12
theou 2x with and without the article after an anarthrous noun.]

Mt 3:16; 4:4; 5:9; 14:33; 27:43, 54;

Mk {1:1}; Mark 11:22; 15:39
Lk 1:35, 78; 2:40; 3:2; 20:36;
Jn 1:6,12; 3:2; 5:44; 6:45; 9:16, 33; 13:3; 16:27, 30; 19:7;
Acts 5:39; 12:22
Rm 1:1, 4,7, 16, 17, 18, 23; 3:5, 18, 21; 4:17; 7:25; 8:9, 14, 16, 17, 18, 33; 9:26;
10:2; 11:22, 33; 13:1, 4, 6; 15:8, 19, 32; 16:26;
1Co 1:1, 3, 18, 24, 30; 2:5, 7; 3:9, 23; 4:1; 6:9, 10, 19; 7:7, 19, 40; 9:21; 10:31;
11:7; 12:3; 15:34, 50;
2Co 1:2, 20; 3:3; 5:1, 21; 6:4, 7, 16; 7:1; 8:5; 11:2; 12:19; 13:4;

126
 Gal 1:1, 3; 3:26; 4:7, 9, 14; 5:21
Eph1:1, 2; 2:8; 5:5; 6:17, 23; Phi 1:2, 11, 28; 2:6, 11, 15; 3:3,9; Col. 1:1, 2;
1Th 1:4; 4:16; 5:18; 2Th 1:2; 1Tim. 1:1, 2, 4, 11; 2:3, 5; 3:5, 15; 6:11; 2Tim. 1:1,
2, 8; Tit 1:1, 3, 4, 7; 2:10, 13; Titus 3:4; Phm. 3; Heb 1:6; 2:9; 3:12; 6:5; 10:31;
11:3; 12:22; Jam 1:1, 5, 13, 20; 2:23; 3:9; 1Pe 1:2, 5, 23; 1Pet. 2:10, 16, 19;
3:22; 4:2, 10, 11; 2Pet. 1:17, 21
1Jn 3:1, 2; 2Jn 3; Jud 21; Rev. 7:2

Dative Case (36x)

Mt 6:24; 19:26; Lk 2:14, 52; 16:13; Jn 3:21; Act 5:29; 24:14; Rm 2:13, 17; 8:8;
16:27; 1Co 7:24; 10:20; 14:2; 2Co 5:11, 13; Gal 2:19; Phi 2:6; 1Th 1:1, 9; 2:4,
15; 4:1; 2Th 1:1, 6; 1Tm 1:17; 4:10; 6:17; Tit 3:8; Heb 12:23; 1Pe 2:4; 20; Jud
1, 25

Accusative case (31x)

Lk 1:18; 10:33; 12:21; 17:3; 20:17; Act 14:15; 19:37; 20:21; Rm 4:2; 8:7, 27;
2Co 7:9 (3x); Gal 4:8; Eph 4:24; 2Th 1:8; 2:4; 1Tim 5:5; Tit 1:16; Heb 6:1, 18;
8:10; 1Pe 1:21; 3:5, 21; 4:6; 5:2; 1Jn 4:12; 2Jn 9.

accusative theon – e.g. Jn 1:18a; 10:13 – as ‘what God is’ (– same as anarthrous in Jn 1:1c) [Cf.
arthrous accusative in 3Jn 11 - ‘Elohim’]
in accusative with the verb eidō – Gal 4:8, 9a – eidō theon (‘know what God is’)
in the preposition phrase with dia, apo, en, pros, upo etc. (also with + ‘theos’ + ‘patros’ – God
the Father) [it points to none other than the very Elohim] Gal 4:9b upo theou 'by what God is'.

[QQ: It would be interesting to check, for example, the examples of arthrous genitive,
dative, or accusative. E.g. 2Pe 1:1 ‘righteousness of the God of ours’ (< ~~of our
Elohim)]

The examples of anarthrous in prepositional phrase: as apo theou, Jn 3:2; 16:30; Rm

13:1 [Rec], 1Co 1:30; 6:19; en theō, Jn 3:21; Rm 2:17; ek theou, Act 5:39; 2Co 5:1;
Phi 3:9; kata theon, Rm 8:27; para theō, 2Th 1:6, 1Pe 2:4. Similarly with an adjective
in 1Th 1:9, theō zōnti kai alēthinō —

127
 anarthrous nominative theos (‘God/god/God-being’)
[esp. relevant for Jn 1:1b and Jn 20:28]

It refers to ‘what God is’, and carries the basic sense of God-being, not focused on 'who
God is' (the identity) itself as in the case of ‘the God’ (‘Elohim’).
• God – Rm 9:5; Heb 8:10; Rev 21:7; (/: a God – KJV, ASV, ALT); /their God –
NET; /their Elohim – ISR; /Same holds here - Mk 12:27 //Lk 20:38 cf. //Mt 22:32
(Elohim)
• God the Father – the fixed Gk. phrase theos patēr; others translate as ‘God the
Father’a. ['God the Father' – needs 'the' for collusion as 'god-father'.] 1Co 1:3; 2Co
1:2, Gal 1:1, Phi 1:2; 2:11, 1Pe 1:2; *God as Father – See EE here.9

• ‘what God is’ – Jn 1:1c (see <A case for study: Jn 1:1>); 1:18; 10:33b; 1Jn 4:12;
2Co 5:19; Gal 4:8, 9; Tit 1:16;
• ‘God-being’ Rm 1:21.
• ‘a god-being’ (2Th 2:4);

Note: the word ‘God’ in all of the above instances points to Elohim and should not have
an indefinite article, while in case of other than what true God is, such as men, angels (>
Hebrew idiom), or polytheistic deities, it is put in lower case, ‘god(s).
• a god – Act 12:22; 28:6
• (so-called) god – 2Th 2:4; [gods (of pagan deity) (pl. – 1Co 8:5)]

It is important to see how the anarthrous nouns (other than the case of uncountable nouns)
are used. E.g. ‘father’ - (1) ‘a father’; (2) ‘Father’ used as a title word; (3) and importantly
in qualitative or adjectival sense – ‘as father-figure’, ‘as father’.

The common expression ‘God the Father’ does not mean that ‘God is a Father’, but rather
‘Elohim as Father’ – Elohim who comes to us to be related as Father; He is as Father to His
Son (Yeshua). Nowhere in the Scripture is the word used as equivalent to father in human
family relation. The designations “Father” and “Son” seem superficially to indicate that there
is an analogy between the divine and the human.

One may be tempted following modern reasoning to say that the use of words like “father”
and “son” for God is “merely” metaphorical, an extension of their human use. But actually,
reverse is the case. God is the original. God made man to be like God, not vice versa. So, it
is appropriate to point out that God is the original Father. In comparison to this original,
human father should be seen as derivative, “metaphorical” extensions of meaning from the
original Fatherhood. In short, such designation is simply an anthropomorphic way of
describing the roles and relationships between the Father and the Son (Elohim and Yeshua)
– a special unique dynamic relationality, not hierarchical stative relativity. It should not be
seen as analogical to human father-and-son relation.10 As the Logos is to Elohim, the Son is
to Father. It is eternal, essential, and equal – ‘no part nor parcel’11 of the whole. The Son

a
Cf. It cannot be translated with the definite article as ‘God Father’, because of a catholic jargon ‘god-
father’).
b
Jn 10:33 - cf. Jn 5:18. ‘ison heauton poiōn tō theō’ (‘making Himself equal to the very Elohim of them’
- not of identity but of equality.
128
 does not come into existence by being derived from Father, not is begotten,a nor is made or
created, nor became one (e.g. by adoption, promotion), just as the Logos, the God’s self-
expression, is not derived, begotten, made, became, created, or became so. Without Son, no
Father; without Father, no Son. From with the dynamic relationality radiates out the Spirit
to impart divine Love, which has nothing to do what we call ‘love’b. God’s love is serious;
no ‘crazy love’, but serious love.

The example which draws our particular attention in Jn 1:1

• En archē ēn ho Logos ‘In beginning [of Creation fiat] was the Word
• kai ho Logos ēn pros ton theon ‘and the Word was toward Elohim (= the God).
• kai theos ēn ho Logos ‘and as what God is, the Word was’.

[Note: capitalized initial letter to denote the identity and specificity, a simple readable aid;
it is unrelated to idea of holiness or divinity which the word may have if any. See
Capitalization in ‘How to read IRENT pages’ in IRENT Introduction

*Concordance Study on theos and elohim (God) – See Appendix in this PDF.

a
begotten – archaic English word. It refers to bringing a child from male principle, cf. ‘be born’ – from female
principle). Not to be confused with then the archaic translation word ‘only begotten’ as in KJV for Gk.
monogenēs.
b
See elsewhere for human love.
129
A case for study: Jn 1:1

*Jn 1:1 'En archē ēn ho logos, kai ho logos ēn pros ton theon, kai theos ēn ho logos'

While the arthrous noun ho theos is 'definite' (e.g. Jn 1:1b), the anarthrous nominative
theos is 'indefinite' and is qualitative. That is fronted in pre-verbal position is for
emphatic, not for making it definite [as in Colwell rule lingo].

"There is no doubt then that the use of the English indefinite article can be used to
bring out both the qualitative aspect of a Greek noun and the indefiniteness derived
from its context." The real problem is not theological or even grammatical but
linguistic. The real question should be "What does 'a god' actually bring to the
readers' mind?" – 'One of several gods?' 'Of different gods?' What are those gods?
Two, three, or more Gods? Or, 'someone or something like a god'?

NEB (also REB) renders it as 'what God was'. However, since the word itself has
nothing to with a grammatical past tense (i.e. as if it is of 'gnomic aspect') and nothing
about what it was, it is clear to have a proper and accurate rendering as 'what God
is'.

Some render it as 'divine'; however, this lukewarm English word (i.e. anything can
be 'divine') is far from what the text says.

IRENT rendered it in Jn 1:1c as ‘as what God is the Word was’, Not to be confused
with Elohim (= ‘the God’) in 1:1b.]; /> what God was – NEB (- gnomic, unrelated
to time idea); /x: Elohim [When some (e.g. ISR) translates this as Elohim same as the
arthrous, it is on the same line as ‘Jesus = Jehovah’ and the readers are not being
helped.]; />> divine; /x: a god – NWT;

In Jn 1:1 (theos ēn ho logos), the article could not have been omitted if John had
wished to designate the logos as ho theos, because in such a connection theos
without the article would be ambiguous. It is clear, however, both from the
distinct antithesis pros ton theon, vv. 1, 2, and from the whole description
(Characterisirung) of the logos, that John wrote theos designedly. [Fn. "Even
hupsistos, which, when it is used for God, ought as an adjective to have the article, is anarthrous
in Lk 1:32, 35, 76; 6:35." (A. Buttm. p. 89.)] Similarly, in 1Pe 4:19 we find kata to
thelēma tou theou pistos kistē without the article. From: Winer and Moulton (1882),
A Treatise on The Grammar of New Testament Greek, Section XIX. OMISSION OF
THE ARTICLE BEFORE NOUNS (pp. 147-163) - p. 151

130
E. Model of God-Yeshua-Humanity Relation:
Trinitarian Model Biblical Model

Mashiah, the Mystery [revealed secret] of Elohim (Col 2:2)

'Yeshua (of the Nazareth)'

'Jesus (of the Church)'
belonging to divinity
from eternity except 30 years
as a man;
The Son is 'God'
as the Father is 'God'.
'God the Son', a deity,
fully man AND fully 'God'
('God Jesus')
The Son is the Second Adam,
Yeshua, belongs to humanity, a true man,
as the only-begotten son of Elohim.@
He is Emobidment of all that God is:
of the God's Word (Jn 1:14)
– Divine Will and Thoughts
of the God's presence (Immanuel Mt 1:23)
in God's kingdom,
and of the God's Love (Jn 3:16; 1Jn 4:18).
His own flesh is as the manna from the heaven,
the bread of the life (Jn 6:51-65).

His divine-ness is in 'what he is' with the God-given authority.

His Lordship is in 'who he is' in the Kindom realm.
'Divinity' is that which is found in 'who Elohim is'.

@ Cf. Yeshua the Nazarene as 'the son of Elohim:

‘'the beloved son of Elohim' (Mt 3:17 //Mk 1:11 //Lk 3:22. Mt 17:7 //Mk 9:7);
'God's Son' (Lk 1:35); 'my chosen Son' (Lk 9:35); the son of Elohim’ (Jn 1:34);
'the only-begotten son of Elohim' (Jn 1:18; 3:16); ‘the only-begotten one’ (Heb 11:17).

131
<a graphic image for copying>

132
 PART II. YHWH and Yeshua
A. YHWH

The Divine Name as in the Scripture

‫( יהוה‬YHWH)
"… I, I am YHWH; that is my name; …"a Isa 42:8a
"I, I am YHWH and there is no other;
there is no Elohim but me." Isa 45:5a
The very God whom His only-begotten Son Yeshua calls ‘Aba’.
“…Hiding the name, obscuring the identity, silencing of the divine name’s pronunciation”

‫י ה ו ה‬
H W H Y

YHWH

‫י‬ Yod ‫י‬

‫ה‬ He ‫ה‬
‫ו‬ Waw ‫ו‬
‫ה‬ He ‫ה‬

a
Many translate blasphemously as 'I am the LORD; that is my name …', making Him a nameless God
– NIV, ESV, NASB, KJV, NKJV, NET, JPS. 'Dominicus – Vulgate]. How can 'the LORD' be anyone's
name?!
133
 *Iehovah – KJV (1611) (J is simply a Gothic font for the capital letter for i.); [vowels are taken
from the vowel points in Masoretic text which tells to be read 'Adonai', nothing to do with
the actual vowel sounds in YHWH.]; Jehovaha – the spelling fixed in the later edition of KJV
with the sound ‘j’ come from French.
→ 'Yehovah'b – phonetically corrected form (adopted by Nehemia Gordon www.nehemiaswall.com/
→ Yehowah (YeHoWaH); (IEhOUAh) – phonetically corrected. [Note: Yeo-ho-wa (여호와) in
Korean]

Iehouáh – Geneva Bible (1560): (as in Psalm 83:18)

Yahweh – a two-syllable word of modern scholars' invention; e.g. in HCSB, JB.
→ 'Yahuweh' – phonetically improved (three-syllable) → Yahueh → Yahuah (a correct form) [Cf.
Tydale 'Iehouah'; IAOU; IAΩ]

Jova – Origenis Hexaplorum, (edited by Frederick Field, 1875)c

a
'j' sound is not in Hebrew, Greek or Latin. No 'v' in the Biblical Hebrew– Ref. https://yrm.org/sacred-
name-yahveh-yahweh/ W or V; Y or J
b
[See Gordon Nehemia] [Cf. https://youtu.be/d9RQmfNK-rk Messenger of The Name <Why the Name
is NOT Yehovah! (or Jehovah)> www.messengerofthename.com/about-the-name/
c
[Note: Sometimes one will see a "j" in Latin. Technically Latin has no letter J. It was introduced in the
13th century or thereabouts to differentiate between the vowel i and the consonant i. The consonantal i is
like our y. "Major" in Latin is pronounced as MAH-yor. Until this last century, most printed Latin texts
used the j to indicate the different sounds. Today the j's are usually replaced with the more classical i's.]
[The "J" glyph is a lot older than that, but it was simply a variant of the "I" glyph] in the Latin alphabet
the letter J was developed as a variant of I, and this distinction was later used to distinguish the consonantal
"y" sound [j] from the vocalic "i" sound [i]. However, at about the same time there was a sound change
in many of the languages of Western Europe, such that the "y" sound changed into a "j" sound ([dʒ], or
sometimes [ʒ]). So, we have it that in English, the letter J now represents a consonant [dʒ] which is not
obviously similar to the vowel [i], despite the fact that they descend from the same letter and the same
sound. (English also has many [dʒ] sounds spelled with J which come from native Germanic roots.)

You can see this history worked out differently in the spelling systems of German and many of the Slavic languages
of Eastern Europe, where the letter J spells the "y" sound [j], and the letter Y, if used at all, is primarily used as a
vowel.
http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/148399/if-the-letter-j-is-only-400-500-years-old-was-there-a-j-sound-that-
preceded-the
134
 Tetragrammaton
The divine name of the only God which is plainly revealed is ‫יהוה‬.

in Phoenician script

in Paleo-Hebrew script

YHWHa [7210x]

] – two different strong numbers from different vowel pointing. Cf.

H3068 (6220x) ‫( י ְהֹוָה‬Gen 2:4, 5; 3:14, 15:1, etc.; Exo 3:2, etc.)
H3069 (608x) (Gen 15:2; Lev 1:31, etc.; Num 2:33, etc.; Deu 3:24, etc.; Jos 7:7, etc.; Rut 1:6;
3:10; 1Sam 4:4, etc.; 2Sam 1:12, etc., 1Kg 2:26, etc. 2Kg 1:152 etc.; 1Ch 2:3, etc. Ezr 1:7, etc.;
Nem 1:5; 5:13; Job 1:7, etc.; Psa 1:2, etc.; Prob 3:7, etc.; Isa 1:10, etc.; Jer 1:6; Ezk 17:3, etc.)
[total # are cited differently.]
www.hebrew4christians.com/Names_of_G-d/YHVH/
The name and titles in OT as in the confusing KJV style:
the LORD YHWH
Lord GOD Sovereign YHWH (Gen 15:2) (/Sovereign LORD – NIV);
LORD God YHWH Elohim (Gen 3:8; 2Ch 6:41)
LORD of hosts YHWH Sabaothb (1Sam 1:3; Psa 24:10, etc.)
Lord Master, Sovereign or Lord c
God Mighty One (whichever best fits the sentence.)

• ‫[ יהוה‬H3068; H3069] A four-letter Hebrew word, called Tetragrammaton; the very name of the
Biblical God. YHWH – the transliterate (not YHVH)
• The name was not to be pronounced in Judaic tradition. [Cf. /Qere_and_Ketiv; various vowel
points – the Leningrad Codex contains seven different qere!]. Instead of uttering the name it was
substituted with 'Adonai (Lord)' or Elohim (God) in its place.
• It is not 'Jehovah' (a hybrid linguistic concoction); it is not 'Yahweh'.
• first occurrence is in Exodus – Exo 3:2; [‘YHWH Elohim ~~ this is my name forever' – Exo 3:15]
• In most OT translations the name is mostly hidden except a few times: e.g. in KJV, 4x– Exo 6:3,
Psa 83:18, Isa 12:2; 26:4. 3x in compound-name – Gen 22:14; Exo 17:15; Jud 6:24] [None appears in
NIV, even where it is specifically said 'this is my name' in Exo 6:3!
• 'I am', 'I Am', or 'I AM' is not His name. [See below '* I AM']
• The real name of the Most High is hidden in most of the English Bible translations which
unconscionably replaces it as 'the LORD' (in all cap) throughout, except very small number of places.
A few translations keep the name in the OT – ASV, NWT, JB, NJB.
• A number of English Bible translations have it in the NT, notable one being NWT.
• The heavenly Father of those in Yeshua Mashiah (Mt 6:9)
The problem of the name of God – (1) finding and having the real name revealed, (2) correct
vocalization in ancient Hebrew (not Modern), (3) how He who carries that name introduces and
describes Himself, and (4) to know what significance of the name (power and authority) and to
have the name kept sanctified (Mt 6:9 //Lk 11:2) in words and actions in our life.
• [See below for * Yah (‘Jah’) (H3050) – Psa 68:4, etc.

a
Not YHVH, nor JHWH.
b
Sabaoth or /Tzevaot (> H6635 Tsaba). /Lord of Armies – GW; /the Heavenly Armies – ISV;
/Almighty LORD – GNB; /the LORD who commands – NET; /
c
lord master, sovereign or lord (or sir! for vocative) – for a referent - a man;
135
 On the history of the word *Jehovah from a Latin transliterate for YHWH:

https://greekandhebrew.wordpress.com/2013/09/23/qere-kethiv/

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Jehovah
Transliteration of Hebrew ‫( י ְהֹוָה‬yəhōwā), the Masoretic vocalization of the Biblical
Hebrew ‫יהוה‬. The Masoretic vocalization is a so-called qeri perpetuum, the deliberate
insertion of the vowels of another word than the one represented by the consonant text,
in this case ‫( אֲדֹנָי‬Adonay - “my lord”).
Continuing earlier Iehoua. In English, the name is first attested in 1530, in Tyndale's
Bible: "I appeared vnto Abraham Isaac and Iacob an allmightie God: but in my name
Iehouah was I not knowne vnto them" (Exodus 6:3). Tyndale used Iehouah instead of
Wycliffe's Adonay. The KJV also has JEHOVAH in this verse specifically, while it
uses LORD otherwise. Young's Literal Translation (1898) has Jehovah. The New King
James Version (1982) has LORD.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah Check for the English word Jehovah – its history and
the pronunciation issue.

Gerard Gertoux, The Name of God Y.eH.oW.aH Which is pronounced as it is Written I_Eh_oU_Ah.
Simplified edition

Pavlos D. Vasileiadis, "Aspects of rendering the sacred Tetragrammaton in Greek" Open Theology
2014, Vol. 1:56-58 https://doi.org/10.2478/opth-2014-0006
"…Hiding the name, obscuring the identity, silencing of the divine name’s pronunciation"

https://youtu.be/SxCQXWuZ9Ko Jeff A. Benner <Is the name of God pronounced Yehovah?>

in 'YHWH Elohim' [Gen 3:14 ‫( יְ ֹהו ָֹ֨ה‬YeHoVaH); Gen 2:4 . ‫( יְ ֹהוָֹ֥ה‬YeHVah)];
in 'Adonai YHWH' [Ezk 17:3 ‫יְ ֹהוִֹ֗ה‬.(YeHViH)]
https://youtu.be/51h8ssppxn0 Jeff A. Benner <This is my Name - ‫ יהוה‬and ‫( אהיה‬Part 2 of 2)>

Vowel points added in Masoretic text – several different ways – foremost in order to
prevent people pronouncing he-Shem.
https://yrm.org/yehovah-deception-pdf/ [Against YHVH over YHWH; Against Yehovah over Yahweh]

“Raise a shout for YHWH all the earth” (Psa 100:1).

Exo 3:1 " … YHWH (Yahuah) – this is my name forever
and by this name I shall be remembered from generation to generation."
Joel 2:32a "And it shall come to pass that
everyone who calls upon the name of YHWH (Yahuah) will be saved; …"

136
Greek trigrammaton ΙΑΩ [IAO] for the Hebrew Tetragrammaton
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4Q120
a Septuagint manuscript (LXX) fragment of the Book of Leviticus. Showing the divine
name in Greek characters, as ΙΑΩ (the trigrammaton) in Lev 3:12; 4:27.

www.degruyter.com/downloadpdf/j/opth.2014.1.issue-1/opth-2014-0006/opth-2014-0006.pdf
Pavlos D. Vasileiadis, "Aspects of rendering the sacred Tetragrammaton in Greek" Open
Theology 2014; Vol. 1:56–88.
[" … The Greek rendering Ιαω /i.a.o/ (Lat. Iao and Iaho) had been the most common, wide-spread,
and ancient pronunciation of the Hebrew/Aramaic divine name that is evidenced in Greek and
Latin sources. …" p. 68]
Pavlos D. Vasileiadis, "The Pronunciation of the Sacred Tetragrammaton: An Overview of a
Nomen Revelatus that Became a Nomen Absconditus", Judaica Ukrainica, Volume II (2013), pp.
5-20. http://judaicaukrainica.ukma.edu.ua/ckfinder/userfiles/files/JU_2_2013_Vasileiadis.pdf

In Greek mss:
• ΙΕΩ (IAΩ)
• ΙΕΩΑ or ΙΕΟΥΑ
• πιπι
• Kurios – most of LXX;

• Theonym ΙΑΩ (IAO) – most common widespread ancient Greek rendering that is
evident in Greek and Latin sources.
• ΙΕΩΑ /i.e.o.a/ and ΙΕΟΥΑ /ieua/ probably the proper pronunciation of the full
Tetragrammaton in Greek during the Second Temple period.
[www.degruyter.com/downloadpdf/j/opth.2014.1.issue-1/opth-2014-0006/opth-2014-
0006.pdf Pavlos Vasileiadis - Aspects of rendering the sacred Tetragrammaton in Greek]

137
The Divine name in English OT translations:

• Christianisms of Church Christianity – His name kept hidden and pushed off and obscuring
the identity; the divine name is not vocalized/pronounced and the name itself is replaced by a
title ("the LORD") in the OT in most Bible translations – hypostatization of divine characteristics
and paganization of the deity’s identity. a They are actually serving a nameless God – Trinity
God.
• With the convenient excuse that the divine name does not appear in the Greek NT text, it is
given to keep the name hidden in NT even in the places where the name is clearly present in the
quoted OT text and even in the places the name itself should be known and revealed and
proclaimed. In effect, the God in Greek NT remains nameless. Instead the Church states that the
name of their Godb is 'Jesus'c, the Creator of Genesis (not of the Creator of the New Creation)

Translation of the Divine Name in OT

/ ‫ יהוה‬- ISR;
/YHWH - Fox, RNKJV;
/Yahweh – Rotherham, Jerusalem Bible, WEB;
/Jehovah – ASV, Darby, YLT, LITV, MKVJ;
/ADONAI – CJB;
/the LORD – most;
/x: the Lord – NET1.0, AMP, BBE, ERV, DRB, Geneva, Bishops, CPDV;
https://thewayofyahuah.fandom.com/wiki/Yahusha_IS_The_Word_Of_YAHUAH!

a
Pavlos D. Vasileiadis, "Aspects of rendering the sacred Tetragrammaton in Greek", Open
Theology 2014; Volume 1: 56-88 (www.degruyter.com/view/j/opth.2014.1.issue-1/opth-2014-
0006/opth-2014-0006.xml )
— "The Pronunciation of the Sacred Tetragrammaton: An Overview of a Nomen Revelatus that
Became a Nomen Absconditus", Judaica Ukrainica, Volume II (2013), pp. 5-20.
http://judaicaukrainica.ukma.edu.ua/ckfinder/userfiles/files/JU_2_2013_Vasileiadis.pdf
b
'Jesus' – what Jesus? Which Jesus? Whose Jesus?
c
'God' – what God? Which God? Whose God? Docetic God? Gnostic God?
138
The name 'Jehovah' or 'Yahweh' appears for the Tetragrammaton in OT: – A few bible
translations keep the name in OT. Some (e.g. NIV) have no name appear in OT, making Him a
nameless God.
Yahweh Jerusalem Bible,
Jehovah ASV; Darby; NWT;
Bible in Living English, S. T. Byington
King James Jehovah – Exo 6:3; Psa 83:18; Gen 22:14 Jehovahjireh;
Version (7x) LORD Jehovah – Isa 12:2 26:4. Exo 17:15 Jehovahnissi;
/Jehovah Jdg 6:24 Jehovahshalom.
An American Exo 3:15; 6:3 Yahweh followed by “the LORD” in brackets.
Translation:
JPS Exo 6:3 Hebrew Tetragrammaton appears in the English text.
Geneva Bible "Jehovah" in Exo 6:3, Psa 83:18, Jer 16:21; 32:18, Gen 22:14; Exo 17:15.

New American Bible & NIV: all are replaced by '(the) LORD'
The New American Bible: A footnote on Exo 3:14 favors the form “Yahweh,” but
the name does not appear in the main text of the translation. In the Saint Joseph
Edition, see also the appendix Bible Dictionary under “Lord” and “Yahweh.”
The Holy Bible translated by Ronald A. Knox: The name Yahweh is found in
footnotes at Exo 3:14 and 6:3.
Revised Standard Version: A footnote on Exo 3:15 says: “The word LORD when
spelled with capital letters, stands for the divine name, YHWH.”
Today’s English Version: A footnote on Exo 6:3 states: “THE LORD: . . . Where the
Hebrew text has Yahweh, traditionally transliterated as Jehovah, this translation employs
LORD with capital letters, following a usage which is widespread in English versions.”
Douay Version: A footnote on Exo 6:3 says:
“My name Adonai. The name, which is in the Hebrew text, is that most proper name of
God, which signifieth his eternal, self-existing being, (Exo 3, 14,) which the Jews out of
reverence never pronounce; but, instead of it, whenever it occurs in the Bible, they read
Adonai, which signifies the Lord; and, therefore, they put the points or vowels, which belong
to the name Adonai, to the four letters of that other ineffable name, Jod, He, Vau, He. Hence
some moderns have framed the name of Jehovah, unknown to all the ancients, whether Jews
or Christians; for the true pronunciation of the name, which is in the Hebrew text, by long
disuse is now quite lost.” (It is interesting that The Catholic Encyclopedia [1913, Vol. VIII, p.
329] states: “Jehovah, the proper name of God in the Old Testament; hence the Jews called it
the name by excellence, the great name, the only name.”)

Cf. *NWT wrongly translates 'Adonai' as 'Jehovah –

Gen 18:3. (/Lord – Douay; /O Lord – ESV; /Please, sir – GW; /x: Sirs – GNT; /My lord –
HCSB, NET; /x: My Lord – KJV, NKJV; My lords – ISV);
Psa 38:15 /(O) Lord my God – most; /xxx: my Lord, my God – CSB;

139
God’s name in NT translations: [See detail elsewhere in this paper.]
e.g.
1. *NWT
2. In the footnote: Darby beginning with Matthew 1:20.
3. The Emphatic Diaglott (by Benjamin Wilson): The name Jehovah is found at Mt
21:9 and in 17 other places in this translation of the Greek New Testament.
4. IRENT renders Gk. anarthrous kurios in reference to Elohim in NT is rendered
usually as 'Adonai'. Where the Divine name is to be revealed and to be known to the
readers, it is rendered as 'YHWH'. (In the NT text, who was writing down the work
and who was speaking and to whom it was being addressed in the context; whether it
is substantive or genitive. Most of arthrous kurios is usually in reference to Yeshua
(i.e. ‘the Lord’ – as to the risen Mashiah); however, there are a few places it is in
reference to God, i.e. ‘the Adonai’.) A few * anarthrous genitive Kuriou (i.e. ‘Lord’s’)
[see below] is in reference to Yeshua -- 1Co 10:21 (2x) NWT has it wrong as ‘of
Jehovah’.

https://youtu.be/LjpGXSyIqTc <The Name of God, Why is the world so determined

to hide it? What is God's real name?>

Problem: 'Yah' (as in 'Yahuah'; not as in the word 'Yehowah' ('Jehovah')

Earle Paul www.youtube.com/channel/UCtMtdPCSHLs8uGWJaXQ3hRA

• How God's Sacred Name was pronounced through history [Timeline #1
(1500 BC – 500 CE); #2 (500 – 1500 CE); #3 1500 CE to present]
https://youtu.be/XzP2eJHI85A (Part 1)
https://youtu.be/kbBC6tLdbfw (part 2)
https://youtu.be/95jF0fbkHOs (Part 3)
• Why call God by His True Name
https://youtu.be/99BlS9OtlgU -

https://youtu.be/iMWE7yJA4fY Restoring the Creator's Name: Ha'Shem Revealed

(full length version) www.messengerofthename.com/

www.creationcalendar.com/NameYHWH/6-ah-eh.pdf

140
"two Yahwehs"
This b.s. idea is a product of imaginative Trinitarian interpretation (eisegesis) of the text
(with 'literal' reading for proof-text out of the context) with such ignorance to come up with
a blasphemous idea of two YHWH to prove the man-made Trinity doctrine!!
Robert Morey (1996), The Trinity – Evidences and Issues. [from p. 116-118]
(1) Gen 19:24 'The only natural interpretation possible is that ‫ יהוה‬in human form standing on
the earth rained fire from ‫ יהוה‬who was in heaven. No other interpretation fits the context and
grammar of the Hebrew text." {;-<}
(2) Gen 32:24 a man wrestled with Yaakob + 32:30 'I have seen Elohim face to face'
(3) Hos 12:4 The 'angel' Yaakob wrestled in is not a created angel, but in the angel of the
Jehovah, the visible manifestation of the invisible God. This angel is same as 'YHWH' Hos
12:5. ["Unitarians usually attempt to make the man with whom Jacob wrestle less than true
deity. They argue that Hos 12:4 identifies the mas as just a created angle who merely
represented God and thus it was not really God per se … But Hosea actually confirms the
identification of the Man as God."!?]
https://sites.google.com/site/yahwehelohiym/yahweh/two-yahwehs (Two Yahwehs?)
Two Yahwehs?
a Yahweh another Yahweh
At Sodom Gen 19:24 One on the The other in the sky
bring down ground
brimstone and fire
At Passover killing Exo 12:29 One, the One, the preventer
firstborn sons destroyer
Walks through them
Exo 33:3 I will send an Exo 33:14 "My face will go with you
angel before you, … Go up …"
to the land flowing with Deu 23:14 YHWH your Elohim
Leaving Sinai till mild and honey. But I will moves around in your camp
entering the Land not go among you' [staying Num 11:1 … When YHWH heard it
behind at Mount Sinai?! ….
The angel is to be another Num 11:11 … Moses said to
YHWH as the one who YHWH, 'Why have you afflicted
was with them →] your servant?'
Num 11:16 YHWH said to Moses …
Exo 33:20 "You shall not Exo 33:11 YHWH speaks Moses face
see my face; for man shall to face as a man speaks to his friend
not see and live"

141
Issues with the divine name: Problem of God's name in OT
Proper translation of the Tetragrammaton is one of few problems of uttermost importance in any translation
of the Bible. The issue is biblical and linguistic. The problem is from theological and religious traditions. Its
translation in the Bible in the OT has been problematic. This is a big subject which has been covered by many
scholars and writers.

1. The divine name is which no one else has. a How is it to be pronounced? Problem of 'Jehovah',
phonetically inaccurate traditional.
2. How is it translated in the Bibles in different languages; different transliteration.
3. Whatever happened to the Divine Name in the Bible (Old Testament)? Why is the divine name
practically missing in most Bible translations of OT In whole sale fashion, the divine name has
systematically been dumped, displaced, disregarded, and dropped off from people' hearing and minds,
instead of the name which should hold us in deep appreciation and reverence.

https://researchsupportsthetruth.wordpress.com/2013/07/08/why-is-gods-name-missing-from-many-
bibles/ – systemically and intentionally replaced, suppressed, and ignored. Helps Trinity God,
effected anti-Semitism.
https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/jesus-christ-son-god-savior/6-jesus-jehovah-yhwh-study-gospels
Mormons confuse YHWH Elohim and Yeshua his Mashiah ('Jesus is Jehovah').

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101989238
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah

4. Did they 'use' the name – down in the NT era? Problem of avoiding of pronouncing His name in
Jewish tradition.b
Ref. G. Gertoux, 'The Use of the Name (YHWH) by Early Christians' – paper in International
Meeting Society of Biblical Literature
http://areopage.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Gertoux_UseNameEarlyChristians.pdf
•

Issues of the Divine Name in OT Bible translation

A blatant and unforgivable example is found in practice of translation of OT. Supposedly
translating from the original Hebrew text, instead, most of Bible translations do

a
Even name 'Yeshua' was a common name in the Gospel times and 'Jesus' is a common name (as a family
name in Spanish)
b

David Clines (1980), "Yahweh and the God of Christian Theology",

"… Somewhere between the fifth and the second centuries B.C. a tragic accident befell God: he
lost his name. More exactly, Jews gave up using God's personal name Yahweh, and began to refer
to Yahweh by various periphrases: God, the Lord, the Name, the Holy One, the Presence, even the
Place. Even where Yahweh was written in the Biblical text, readers pronounced the name as
Adonai. With the final fall of the temple, even the rare liturgical occasions when the name was
used ceased, and even the knowledge of the pronunciation of the name was forgotten …"
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0040571X8008300503
Meanwhile, 'Jesus' of Constantine Church was made God – 'God Jesus' of Trinitarians. – ARJ

142
conveniently adopt LXX Greek text for the name of their God. The name YHWH is
replaced by 'the LORD', a non-specific (not necessarily 'divine') title (corresponding to
anarthrous Gk. kurios in LXX and GNT. Only handfuls (such as ASV, Jerusalem Bible,
NWT, Korean Bibles, etc.) do not follow this modernizing path of making the Name
hidden and discarded, whereas countless places in the Bible emphasizes the name of
Elohim ('God').

Issues of the Divine Name in NT Bible translation

– Rational, Practice and Principlea

• to have His name revealed and to have His name sanctified

• significance of the divine name for the 'Christians' and the followers of Lord
Yeshua Mashiah.

Here, what is to be concerned with is whether this Name is to be in the New Testament – why,
where (in what text verses), and how (correct transliteration; Tetragrammaton vs. Adonai). Since it
is purely from biblical and linguistic ground which the rationale and practice of IRENT
incorporating the Divine Name in the NT stand on, it is not associated with Sacred Name
Movement b or Hebraic Roots Movement and its various organizations, such as Jehovah's
Witnessesc, Messianic Jews, etc. Some of them having produced their own bible translations which
should be judged on their own merits for accuracy.

Without the name YHWH of Elohim, no Yeshua Mashiah; without Yeshua, no YHWH.
[The whole of biblical faith rests on the biblical statement:
(1) YWHW Elohim is one (Mk 12:29), and
(2) Yeshua is the son of Elohim (Mk 1:11; 9:7; Lk 22:70)
(3) 'Have your name be sanctified and honored' - the basis of our prayer is the name of
Elohim – Mt 6:9 //Lk 11:2
(4) 'YHWH is our shepherd; I shall lack nothing' – Psa 23:1.

Not ‘Triune God’; not ‘God the Son’ – both unbiblical religious lingos.]

a
Ref: Pavlos Vasileiadis, "Jesus, the New Testament, and the Sacred Tetragrammaton" –
(2013)
www.academia.edu/38647628/_Jesus_the_New_Testament_and_the_sacred_Tetragrammaton_
b
www.sacredname.com/Articles/What-Is-the-Sacred-Name-Movement.html
Ref. Kurian et al. (2016), Encyclopedia of Christianity in the United States – "Sacred Name Movement"
pp. 2004-5. [a copy in the Collection]
"…The movement is characterized by beliefs (1) that people should use the personal name of God, the
tetragrammaton (YHWH, variously pronounced as Yahweh, Jehovah, etc.), as well as other Hebrew
terms for the divine, (2) that Christians should use the Hebrew name for Jesus (e.g., Yahshua, Yeshua,
Yehoshua, etc.), and (3) that practices that would usually be considered distinctly Jewish, such as
festivals and dietary laws, should be restored. …"
c
(the name which was adopted Joseph Franklin Rutherford 1931 for his group of Bible Student movement)
143
*Yah
‫( יּה‬H3050) (50x in OT) (/x: Jah) = the name of the very God in the Scripture. A short form of YHWH, which
itself seems theophoric, ‘Yah who shall be’, i.e. ‘who shall be with His people’, rather than ‘self-existing being’
(as in LXX Gk ho ōn ‘the being’ in Exo 3:24 Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh) which is an abstract notion from Greek
philosophy, totally unrelated to the Hebrew mindset.] /Jah
[-- King James Version there is only a single instance of JAH (in all caps) in Psa 68:4. An American
Translation (1939) follows KJV in using Yah in this verse. (/x: Jehovah – ASV; /xx: the LORD – most; /Jah
– YLT, Darby; /xxx: the Lord – Douay).
Exo 15:2; 17:16;
43 times in the Psalms, Psa 68:4; 77:11; 94:7, 12; 102:8; 104:35; 105:45; 106:48; 111:1; 112:1;
113:1, 9; 115:17, 18 (2x); 116:19; 117:2; 118:5 (2x); 14, 17, 18, 19; 122:4; 130:3; 135:1, 3, 4, 21;
146:1, 10; 147:1, 20; 148:1, 14; 149:1, 9; 150:1, 6 (2x); etc. Yah
Psa 89:8 YHWH Elohim Tzevaot ~~ Yah the Mighty
Psa 68:18 Yah Elohim
Psa 104:35 YHWH Yah
Isa 12:2; 26:4 “Yah YHWH”; 38:11 (2x) Yah ~ Yah
Song of Songs 8:6 “the flame of Yah”.

[Cf. Gk. Ἀλληλουϊά in Rev 19:1–6 'Praise Yah a (spelt in English as ‘hallelujah’ but actually being
pronounced correctly as ‘-yah’. Many Hebrew proper (theophoric) names (141x) have ending of –yah;
sometimes – yahu in Masoretic text.] [QQQ any with yahu- or yeho-?]
http://jbq.jewishbible.org/assets/Uploads/421/JBQ_421_4_Yah.pdf
Clifford Hubert Durousseau, “YAH: A NAME OF GOD”

“His name Yah”

Sing yoů to Elohim;
sing and praise His name;
Exalt the One riding through the desert plainsb
— Yah by His name — c
Rejoice before Him [Psa 68:4]

“Praise Yah!” [> Hallelu Yah]

Bless thou YHWH, O my soul.
Praise ye Yah! [Psa 104:35]
Praise YHWH ~ Praise Yah [Psa 117:1 ~ 2]
Praise Yah! ~ Praise YHWH [Psa 146:1; 148:1]
Praise Yah! [Rev 19:1, 3, 4, 6]; Praise our Elohim! [Rev 19:4]

a
‘Hallelu-Yah’ (‘Praise Yah’): How many do realize that the English word ‘Hallelujah’ or ‘Allelujah’ (with j actually
pronounced as y!) which they fancy to shout out does actually mean?
b ‘riding through the desert plains' – NWT, /rides on the clouds – NET; (x: rides upon the heavens – KJV+; H6160 arabah)
c
Yah ░░ [to what this phrase construes? 'ride' or 'the one riding'] /Yah - CJB, WEB; /Jah – NWT; /JAH – KJV!, Jubilee
2k; /xx: Jehovah – ASV; /xx: Yahweh – HCSB; /xxx: the LORD – NIV, ESV, CSB; JPS, NASB, NET, NHEB; /xx:
Lord– Aramaic in Plain English; /
144
'Praise Yah' 24x in OT; In 23 verses in the Book of Psalms (104–106, 111–117, 135,
145–150), but twice in Psa 150:6. It starts and concludes a number of Psalms

Psa 111:1a Praise@ Yah! I will praise# YHWH

with all my heart,
/> Praise Jah – NWT; /x: Praise the LORD – NIV; /x: Praise the LORD! – NKJV, NASB, ESV, GNT;
/Praise ye the LORD – KJV; /Praise the LORD! – NET; /xx: confess Jehovah – Aramaic PE); /xx: give
thanks unto Jehovah – ASV; /Hallelujah! – HCSB, Berean Study, CSB; /Praise to the LORD! – CEB;
@H1984 halal (165x) 'give praise'
#H3034 yadah (114x) 'give thanks' 'praise'

4x in NT (Rev 19:1, 3, 4, 6).

'… this is my name forever' Exo 3:15

'… I am YHWH …but by name I was not known by the name' Exo 6:2-3
"Let them praise the name of YHWH
for his name alone is excellent;
his glory [is] above the earth and heaven." Psa 148:13
'… I am YHWH your Elohim and no other.'
this is my name forever' Joel 2:27

"Stand up and praise YHWH your Elohim,

who is from everlasting to everlasting."
"Blessed be your glorious name,
and may it be exalted above all blessing and praise." Neh 9:5

Beginning of our journey in faith

in hearing the Word of Elohim from reading and learning,
the Scripture is to know YHWH, the very name He himself revealed.

145
 Psa 9:10 And they that know Your name will put their trust in You,
for You, O YHWH, have not forsaken them that seek You.
Psa 86:11 "Teach me O YHWH to walk in your truth; (Psa 25:4, 5; 27:11)
Make my heart undivided so as to fear your name." (Psa 25:12)
Psa 83:18 And let them know that you, whose name is YHWH,
You alone are the Most High over all the earth.
Jn 12:28 Yeshua: 'O Abba, have your name glorified'
From the heaven: 'I have glorified my name and will glorify it again'
(S1392 doxazō to bring glory, to honor)
Jn 17:26 " …and I’ve made known to them Your name
and I’ll make it known;
so that the love with which You’ve loved me
may be in them and I in them."
Mt 6:9 '… Have Your name be sanctified and honored.'
(S37 hagiazō 'keep holy' 'set apart as holy')
Psa 118:26 '… in the name of YHWH' – OT text; However, in the quotation in Mt 21:9 //Mk
11:9 '~~ the One who comes in the same of Adonai' as the word was put on the lips of the
common people (crowd) who should not be allowed to utter the divine name – it is not possible
for them to know the name neither.

Against misusing the Divine Name:

Exo 20:7 "You shall not take the name of YHWH your Elohim
in unworthy mannera
for YHWH will not hold anyone guiltless
who takes His name in unworthy manner.
Lev 19:12 "Do not make oaths falselyb by My name;
do not profanec the name of your Elohim; I am YHWH.d
Lev 22:2, 32; 'not profane my holy name'

Mt 6:9 //Lk 11:2 "May your name be sanctified'

a
Exo 20:7 //Deu 5:11 - 'take ~ in unworthy manner' - /make useless (H7723 shav 'empty' 'worthless' '/x:
vain') + take (H5375 nasah); [cf. H7722 sho – desolation, devastation, ruin, destruction; Job 30:3; Psa
35:8]; /x: take in vain – KJV, NASB, NET; /x: misuse – NIV, HCSB; /xx: use carelessly – GW; /xxx: use
for evil purpose – GNT; /dishonor;
b
'make oaths falsely' – [H7650 shaba 'swear' 'make an oath'] [H8267 sheqer 'falsehood']
c
'profane' - H2490 chalal (1) to pierce' 'to bore' (Psa 109:22); (2) play a pipe (Psa 87:7); (3) defile, profane
(Lev 21:4, 9; Ezk 22:16)
d
Cf. Deu 6:1; 10:3 'Fear YHWH your Elohim, serve Him, and take your oaths in His name.'
146
Just as the name of the King is not to be used by his subject other than when the name is to be
known and revealed, so is the divine name in ordinary conversation. The Name is to be revered.
Nothing is as important and sacrosanct as the very name of a person – much more so the name
of the Almighty Creator. Where the use of the name is not appropriate His judgment shall be
against them. The divine name is not for a mantra. On the other hand, removing the name and
replacing with a title in many vernacular translations of OT is simply from spirit of deception.

Replacing a name by a title ('Lord', 'God', 'Almighty'; L'Eternal, Ha'Shem) or a

metonymic word (Heaven) is a worse kind of offense one can make – a grave
sin against Him.

147
God's name & title:
YHWH Elohim – Gen 2:15; Exo 3:15 /Jehovah Elohim – Darby; /Jehovah God – NWT, YLT;
/xx: the LORD God – most; /x: the Lord God - Douay; /Yahweh God – WEB, JB; /
*Adonai YHWH – Gen 15:2; Exo 23:17 – /Lord Jehovah – JB, Darby; /Sovereign Lord Jehovah
– NWT; /xx: Sovereign LORD – NIV; /xx: Lord GOD – most; /xxx: Lord God – Douay; /

'Elohim' itself is a title, not a name; just as Gk. theos. But the important difference is its usage.
Whereas theos ('God') is not infrequently used for other than Elohim the Almighty, 'Elohim' is
almost exclusively used in reference to Him. The translated words theos in Gk and God in English
when used in reference to Him is not related by itself to His identity or reality. [Cf. capitalization
convention in English only to help distinguish from other god-beings – gods or god.].
Psa 50:1, “El Elohim, YHWH, has spoken …”
Psa 50:7 “… I am Elohim, your Elohim.”)
Exo 20:2 ‘I am YHWH your Elohim …
Gen 46:3 ‘I am the El, Elohim of your father’ (YHWH himself said to Yaakob in vision).
Isa 42:5-9 (v. 5) "Thus said the El YHWH ~~:
(v. 6) <I am YHWH. I, I have called you in righteousness; ~~
(v. 8) I am YHWH; that is my name. My glory I'll give to no one ~~~.>
Exo 6:29 ‘I am YHWH …

El (248x) H410 – Gen 14:18; Exo 6:3, Num 12:13;

Elah (95x) H426 – Ezr 4:26
Elohim (over 2000x) – Gen 1:1
El Elyon (the Most-High) (28x) –Gen 14:18.
El Olam (The Eternal) – Gen 21:33; Jer 10:10; Isa 26:4
Adonai (434x) – Gen 15:2
El Qanna (Jealous) (6x) – Exo 20:5
YHWH (6519x) – Gen 2:4
El Shaddai (God the Almighty > the Almighty God) (7x) H7706 – Gen 17:1; 35:11a

S3841 pantokratōr (10x)

Rev 11:17; 15:3; 16:7 [vocative] 'O Adonai, El Shaddai'
4:8; 21:22 [nominative] 'YHWH El Shaddai'
1:8; 'YHWH Elohim ~~~ the Almighty'
19:6 'Adonai our Elohim, the Almighty'
16:14; 19:6, 15 'Elohim the Almighty'

2Co 6:18 Adonai the Almighty

Note: Yeshua never addressed the Almighty Elohim by the divine name, nor by the word
'Elohim', but by a simple but profound expression 'Abba' [vide infra 'God as Father']. He was
made (or became) 'God' by the Church.

a
LXX has them simply ho theos ‘the God’) = God the Almighty (ho theos ho pantokratōr – Rev 11:18)
[Gk. word pantokratōr does not appear in LXX OT.]
148
Name of God

To come to know the Name to one’s heart is

the beginning of Wisdom
— knowing the Truth, divine reality.
There is power in the Name
— none can revere Him apart from His name.
[Prov 1:7; 9:10]

Prov 30:4 “… what is His name and what is the name of His son — if you know?”
Psa 111:9 “He has sent redemption to His people:
He has commanded His covenant forever:
holy and reverenda is His NAME.

And it shall come to pass that

whosoever calls upon the name of YHWHb
shall be delivered.
[Joel 2:32a //Act 2:21; //Rm 10:13]

— knowing the Truth, divine reality.

There is power in the Name
— none can revere Him apart from His name.
Isa 25:9. -- It will be said on that day, “Behold, this is our Elohim; we have waited for him,
that he will save us. This is YHWH; we have waited for him; let us be glad and rejoice in his
salvation.”
Psa 99:3, Psa 111:9, Isa 57:15 -- say His Name is Holy.
Jer 16:20-21 -- those [forsaken YHWH Elohim] shall know that my Name is YHWH.
Exo 9:16 -- reveals that His Name is to be known throughout all the earth.
Psa 140:13 --tells that the righteous will give thanks unto His Name.
Exo 20:24b -- "In every place I cause my name to be remembered,
I will come to you and bless you".
Isa 52:6 – "His people shall know His Name."
Mal 2:2 -- "If you will not listen, if you will not take it to heart to give honor to my name,
says YHWH of hosts, then I will send the curse upon you and I will curse your blessings.
Indeed, I have already cursed them, because you do not lay it to heart."

a
[Note: as a translation word in the Bible the word reverend appears only once here in the whole Bible, as
applied to YHWH Elohim – how could we lift it to throw onto mortal men?!] [yare H3376] /reverend –
KJV; /awesome – NET, NIV, ESV; /awe-inspiring – HCSB; /fearful – YLT; /terrible – Darby, Douay;
/terrifying – GW; /awful – JPS; /mighty – GNB; /]
b
Cf. For the name Yeshua:
Act 4:12 "And indeed, in no one else
there is such salvation [from Elohim] to be found,
for there is no other name under the heaven [beside his] [cf. Phi 2:9]
that has been given among mortal humans
by which we must get saved."
149
 Name YHWHa and its meaning - Exodus
• Exo 3:14-15 –
Elohim said to Moses, “I'm who I'm”;
And he said, “You must say this to the Israelites that
<I'm has sent me to you>.”
Elohim also said to Moshe, “You must say this to the Israelites,
‘YHWH Elohim of your fathers
– Elohim of Abraham, Elohim of Isaac, and Elohim of Yaakob – b
has sent me to you.
This is my name eternal
and this is to remember me to all generation.”
• Isa 52:6 Therefore my people shall know my name: therefore, in that day, behold, I, I
am the one who speak [to them].
• Joel 2:32 (//Act 2:21) Those who call YHWH’s name shall be delivered.
• Exo 20:7 = Deu 5:11 [in the Ten Commandments] You shall not take up the name of
Jehovah your God in a worthless way (> in vain) for YHWH will not leave the one
unpunished who takes up his name in a worthless way.
I'm who I'm.” ehyeh asher ehyeh. [/> I am who I am; /> I am that I am – NET; /I Am Who I am –
GW, NLT; /xx: I AM WHO I AM; /xx: I Will Become What I Choose – NWT; /xxx: THE BEING –
Benton LXX; /xxxx: I AM THAT WHICH I AM – YLT;
who [H834 asher]
I'm [ehyeh H1961 hayah] /x: I AM; /I am – NET; /x: HE WHO IS – Douay; /xxx: THE
BEING – Brenton LXX; /xxx: I will Become – NWT;

ehyeh in this text is often translated as 'I AM' (in all caps) as if it is something of the very
name of God, which is not. Hebrew word in OT is 'I'm', not 'I am', nor 'I Am' or 'I AM'. [not
same Trinitarian phrase 'I AM' in Jn 8:58 egō eimi – which should simply be translated as 'I, I
am' = 'I, I am [who I am]' ≈ Jn 13:19.
Note: The phrase <I AM>, <the Great I AM>, <Jesus the Great "I AM"> (in caps) – all
theological construct, unbiblical trinitarian jargons of 'Jesus-God' religion.

English verb 'to be' is a copula; by itself it does not mean 'to exist'. Same for the Gk. e.g. Jn
8:58 egō eimi (I am) does not mean 'I exist'. It should be same in Hebrew whether it is 'I am' (Exodus
4:12) or 'You are' 'He is' (Exodus 4:16); it is not 'I exist' or 'You exist' 'He exists', etc.

a
https://youtu.be/pUK7pVZd3Fs
b
Quoted in Mt 22:32; //Mk 12:26; //Lk 20:37.
150
He gives the command to “call on my name” – Psa 99:6;
to proclaim His name – Deu 32:3.
to exalt His Name – Psa 34:3; Isa 2:4;
to glorify His name – Isa 40:10; 24:45; Psa 86:9, etc.
to sanctify His name – Isa 29:23;
to honor His name – Psa 66:2, 4;
to praise His Name – 2Sam 22:50;
to magnify His name – Psa 34:3; 69:30; Gen 12:2;
to remember His Name – Exo 3:15; Psa 20:7
to sing to His Name – Psa 9:1-2;
to think upon His Name – Mal 3:16;
to confess – 1Ki 8:33; 2Ch 6:24,
to trust in His name – Zep 3:12; Isa 50:10; Psa 9:10
to love your name – Psa 5:11

to declare His Name – Rm 9:17; Heb 2:2;

to sanctify His Name – Mt 6:9 //Lk 11:2;

151
Compound names
www.blueletterbible.org/study/misc/name_god.cfm
YHWH Nissi (~ My Banner) (1x) Exo 17:15 kurios kataphugê mou (my refuge)
YHWH-Raah (~ My Shepherd) Psa 23:1, Gen 48:15, etc.
YHWH Rapha (~ That Heals) Exo 15:26, Cf. Jer 30:17; Isa 30:26; Psa 103:3
YHWH Shammah (~ Is There) (1x) Ezk 48:35
YHWH Tsidkenu (~ Our Righteousness) (2x) Jer 23:6; 33:16;
YHWH Mekoddishkem (~ Who Sanctifies You) (2x) Exo 31:13; Lev 20:8;
YHWH Jireh (~ Will Provide) (1x) Gen 22:14; kurios eiden – (LORD has seen)
YHWH Shalom (~Is Peace) (1x) Jdg 6:24
YHWH Sabaoth (~ of Hosts) (over 285x) 1Sa 1:3; Psa 24:10; Isa 1:23, Zec 1:3, etc.
[Tzva’ot H6635 (hosts, armies) LXX has it kurios tōn dunameōn.]

Here again, the term ‘name’ (in the sense of singular proper person name – that which represent the
character of the person) has to be carefully distinguished from a ‘title’. ‘Many names of God’ or ‘Many
names of Jesus’ is a linguistically confused statement.

YHWH in compound name: [Gen 22:14; Exo 17:15; Jud 6:24 in KJV]
YHWH your Elohim, YHWH the Elohim – 1Ch 22:19;
YHWH – Gen 4:1, 3, 6, 9, 13, 15, 16, 26; 5:29, 6:3, etc., 15:4, 6;
YHWH Elohim – Gen 2:4, 7, 7, 9, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, 22; 3:1, 8, 9, 13, 14, etc.; 2Ch 6:41; Psa 84:11
YHWH Elohim of Israel – 2Ch 11:16; 2Kg 19:15; 1Sam 23:11;
YHWH Elohim of my master (adoni) – Gen 24:27, 48;
YHWH Elohim Tzevaot (of hosts) – Psa 89:8;
the Lord YHWH Tzevaot – Isa 10:16; [H113 adon 'lord' 'master'; Cf. adoni 'my lord']
YHWH El of vengeance – Psa 94:1
YHWH Elohim of the heavens – Gen 24:7; Neh 1:5;
Adonai YHWH – Gen 15:2, 8; Isa 26:16; 65:13 (Sovereign Lord YHWH) [H136 adonai
'Lord' – only for the Elohim] /xx: Lord GOD – KJV, HCSB; /x: Sovereign LORD – NIV, NET;
/Lord Jehovah – Darby; /Sovereign Lord Jehovah – NWT; /
/x: Lord Elohim (Lord God); /x: YHWH Lord; /x: Lord YHWH;
YAH YHWH – Isa 26:4; (x: LORD GOD)
El Shaddai (God Almighty) (7x) – Gen 17:1, 28:3; 35:11; 43:13; 48:3; Exo 6:2; Ezk 10:5;
[cf. 'a mighty El' (el gibbor Isa 9:6)]

152
On uttering the Name of God
['The name is unpronounceable since it has no vowels'?! Nobody knows the true name of
God'?! – Martin Walter, "Jehovah's Witnesses, Jesus and the Holy Trinity" –
www.blueletterbible.org/audio_video/martin_walter/Cults/Kingdom_of_the_Cults.cfm ]
Tetragrammaton from https://youtu.be/SxCQXWuZ9Ko (Is the name of God pronounced
Yehovah?)

Gen 2:4 Gen 3:14

Prohibition and avoidance of uttering (x: pronouncing) of YHWH (the Name of

Elohim)

It is not about to prohibit pronouncing then name, but to keep the name honor the
name of Elohim himself at the penalty of blasphemy.

No one would call his father by the name! The name is used for identification and
reference, not for using to call and call up. Numerous such ‘names’ (actually titles
or descriptors – epithets) for God are in the Bible for such purpose.

Cf. The combination of name and title for a person: ‘YHWH Elohim’ ‘Yeshua
Mashiah’, etc.

In English usage, the phrase ‘President Lincoln’ may be used to call him; not
‘Lincoln President’.)

Jewish point of view: from www.jewfaq.org/name.htm

Nothing in the Torah prohibits a person from pronouncing the Name of God.
Indeed, it is evident from scripture that God's Name was pronounced routinely.
Many common Hebrew names contain "Yah" or "Yahu," part of God's four-letter
Name. The Name was pronounced as part of daily services in the Temple.

The Mishnah confirms that there was no prohibition against pronouncing The Name
in ancient times. In fact, the Mishnah recommends using God's Name as a routine
greeting to a fellow Jew. Berakhot 9:5. However, by the time of the Talmud, it was
the custom to use substitute Names for God. Some rabbis asserted that a person who
utters pronounces YHVH according to its letters (instead of using a substitute) has
153
 no place in the World to Come, and should be put to death. Instead of pronouncing
the four-letter Name, we usually substitute the Name "Adonai," or simply say "Ha-
Shem" (lit. The Name).

Although the prohibition on utterance applies only to the four-letter Name, Jews
customarily do not utter any of God's many Names except in prayer or study. The
usual practice is to substitute letters or syllables, so that Adonai becomes Adoshem
or Ha-Shem; Elohaynu and Elohim become Elokaynu and Elokim; Eil becomes
Keil, etc.

With the Temple destroyed and the prohibition on pronouncing The Name outside
of the Temple, utterance of the Name fell into disuse. Scholars passed down
knowledge of the correct pronunciation of YHVH for many generations, but
eventually the correct pronunciation was lost, and we no longer know it with any
certainty. We do not know what vowels were used, or even whether the vav in the
Name was a vowel or a consonant. See Hebrew Alphabet for more information
about the difficulties in pronouncing Hebrew. Some religious scholars suggest that
the Name was pronounced "Yahweh," but others do not find this pronunciation
particularly persuasive. Historian Flavius Josephus, who was born a kohein at a
time when the pronunciation of the Name was still known, said that the name was
four vowels (War of the Jews, Book V, Ch. 5), probably referring to the fact that
each of the four consonants in the name can serve in Hebrew as a vowel or vowel
marker.
[Note: 'utter' and 'pronounce' are different words, used differently - ARJ.]

On vocalization, pronunciation, transliteration, translation

Hebrew text – un-pointed vs. pointed
'full' vs. 'defective' spelling.

'Mater lectionis'
[Ref http://biblicalhebrew.org/mater-lectionis.aspx
The usage of certain consonants to indicate a vowel in the spelling of Hebrew, Aramaic, and
Syriac languages is called matres lectionis (Latin “mothers of reading”, singular form: mater
lectionis, Hebrew: ‫ אֵ ם ק ְִריָאה‬mother of reading). The letters that do this in Hebrew are ‫( א‬aleph),
‫( ה‬he), ‫( ו‬waw) and ‫( י‬yod). The ‫ י‬and ‫ ו‬in particular are more often vowels than they are
consonants.
http://biblicalhebrew.org/remarks-on-pronunciation.aspx
‫ א‬is the “soft breathing” like the h in English hour.
‫ ה‬is the “rough breathing” like the h in English heat.]

Mater lectionis – Wiki

Youtube -https://youtu.be/0zZs6rchslY https://youtu.be/FUhG4oY24AY
https://youtu.be/7UehfGooxUM ]
https://www.ancient.eu/video/1299/

QQ: check for the Biblical Hebrew letter 'vav' vs. 'waw'.
QQ: 'pronounce' 'vocalize' 'utter' of the Divine name.

154
The *Tetragrammaton, a four-letter Hebrew word ‫( יהוה‬yod, hé, waw, hé) of 'the name' (HaShem) of
Elohim in the Hebrew Scripture which is transliterated as YHWH in English. a [Cf. Six Hebrew spellings
of the tetragrammaton are found in the Leningrad Codex with different vowel pointings (niqqud).] [6,829
times in the Hebrew Scriptures.]
The four letters are as vowels (semi-vowels), rather than consonants. Its pronunciation in three syllables:
Ya-hu-ah. [

[YHWH – (1) it is w, not v in the biblical Hebrew and (2) there is no J in Hebrew (as appearing
in ‘Jehovah’b); (3) Various Masoretic vowel pointings (niqqud) tells how to vocalize it with
different sense of the word.

A proper name should be only transliterated, as phonetically close to the original as possible.
Traditionally this name was translated as Jehovah. [Note: In KJV 1611 it was Iehovah.] were
no J and V sounds in the Hebrew language.

Many modern scholars accept Yahwehc. It is pronounced as ya-hweh in two syllables, not yah-
weh (with w actually having sound value of long u, or oo, which then makes it yah-u-eh as the
way it should be easily and clearly pronounced). [Note: Hebrew letter ‫ ה‬has a sound value of
voiceless glottal fricative.]

IRENT has adopted the Tetragrammaton itself (YHWH) as a translation word for the anarthrous
kurios when the very name of Elohim is to be known by and revealed to the readers; otherwise,
it is usually rendered as Adonai. Cf. Its 'pronunciation' vs. (custom of avoiding) its
'utterance'. The name which carries His authority is something to be known and revealed;
but also, to be sanctified (Mt 6:9 //Lk 11:2), revered, and honored. Would anyone dare
to call their own father by uttering His name?!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahweh
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah#_note-7

a
Transliterate of the Tetragrammaton, a four-letter Hebrew word ‫( יהוה‬yod, hé, waw, hé) for the name of the
God. [‘Yah’ is a shortened form.] Compare with Gk ΙΑΩ (trigrammaton).
Not YHVH (as in Modern Hebrew) or JHVH (as in Latin spelling). Cf. History of ‘J’: the sound /j/ (not to be
confused with [j] in IPA) became only from 17th century with the letter (glyph) “J” was used as a Gothic font
for the capital “I”. Cf. History of “u”, “oo”, “v”, and “w” letters and sounds.
Ref: www.yrm.org/yahveh-yahweh.htm
www.yaiy.org/literature/SpellSacredName.html
www.yahushua.net/YAHUWAH/chapter_07.htm [U, V or W?]
www.hebrewtoday.com/content/hebrew-alphabet-letter-vav-%D7%95
www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/8568-jehovah
www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/11305-names-of-god
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Jehovah
b
'Yehowah'. Not 'Jehovah' – which is originated from Latin transliterate for YHWH. Phonetically ‘v’ sound
is only in Modern Hebrew; it is w sound in the ancient Hebrew as well as in related Semitic languages. In
English ‘j’ sound is a recent development in mid-17th century later than KJV 1611.] The initial vowel is ‘a’,
not ‘e’, as in His name in the form of ‘Yah’.
c
See "Yahuah >Yahueh > Yahuwah > 'Yahuweh' > 'Yahweh'
Cf. YaHWeh [sic] by David Bivin www.jerusalemperspective.com/2610/), pronounced as YĀ-we.
Yahweh commonly accepted by most of modern scholars: ‘ya-h-weh’ with h silent.
155
Why 'Yehovah' or 'Jehavah' is not the name of Elohim?
[ https://youtu.be/FQKuQ1Owzq8 7 Reasons the Name YEHOVAH Is a Counterfeit!]
https://yrm.org/yehovah-deception-pdf/ The Yehovah Deception – Reinventing a Misnomer. (a
copy in <IRENT Vol. III - Supplement (Collection #3A.1)>

1. from using vowel points of 'Adonai' for YHWH; different vowel points, etc.
2. 'v' is modern Hebrew.
3. Greek name (LXX) – e.g. DSS Manuscript 4:120-4QpapLXXevb 'IAΩ'
4. A short form, 'Yah'

Vowel pointing:
Masoretic text for TaNaKh (Hebrew Scripture) – btw 7th and 10th c. CE – the text was written with
niqqud (‘vowel pointing’).
Different pointing giving different meaning:

1. YeHWaH ~ Jeremiah 3:25

2. YHoWaH ~ Genesis 18:17
3. YeHoWaH ~ Genesis 3:14 (= pointing of Adonai ‘Lord’ – not Adoni ‘my Lord’)
4. YHWiH ~ Psalms 68:21
5. YeHWiH ~ Genesis 15:2, 8
6. YeHoWiH ~ 1 Kings 2:26, Jdg 16:28
7. YaHWaH ~ Psalms 144:15

By adding different vowel points, it is variously vocalized with different meaning of the word. The
most common way to avoid to vocalize it is to read it as ‘Adonai’. [? following the common
Masoretic practice?]

‫( י ְהֹוָה‬YAHUAH) vs. ‫( אֲדֹנָי‬ADONAI): Their vocalization is not identical [with different vowel points=.
[www.abrahamicstudyhall.org/2017/03/21/yhwh-bibical-tetragrammaton/ ]

(Ref: www.yahweh.org/publications/sny/sn09chap.pdf )

English word ‘Jehovah’ as known traditionally is a later development (with J sound of Romance
language nonexistent in English prior to 14th century, did not become widely known until mid-17th
century. The last letter put into the alphabet of English language.) No J sound in exists in Hebrew
language. It appears as JEHOVAH in KJVa (1611 and 1769) in all caps, the Letter J being simply a
Gothic font for the letter I in capital, thus actually pronounced as Iehovah at the time of 1611 version.
In modern edited version of KJV (1769 edition which is in current use) has it as ‘Jehovah’ only in
seven verses of OT [of course, with V is a wrong transcription of W (= oo) with a different Heb. letter
for v itself; and modern J sound was a later development in English.]
(1) as "Jehovah" in four passages where the name is particularly stressed [Exo 6:3; Psa 83:18 (H
19); Isa 12:2; Isa 26:4] (IEHOVAH in KJV1611; JEHOVAH in KJV 1769)
(2) and, in three passages to form transliterated constructs [e.g., Jehovah-jireh (Gen 22:14);
Jehovah-nissi (Exo 17:15); Jehovah-shalom (Jdg 6:24)]. [Cf. Iehouah-ijreh – in KJV1611;
Jehovahjireh – in KJV 1769 and notice the letter j in lower case] [Cf. Iehouáh-iireh – Geneva
(1560). From Iehouah in Tyndale. Cf. Luther German Bible rendered as ‘Herr’ (i.e. ‘LORD’)]

a
KJV 1611 – for the text and scanned pages of the original, see www.kingjamesbibleonline.org .]
156
Ref. www.scribd.com/doc/150916651 (scanned text of the original KJV1611)
http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611-Bible/ http://1611bible.com/
https://archive.org/details/TheGenevaBible1560 (scanned text of the original)

157
 Pronunciation of YHWH – Yahuah > Yahuwah >> Yahueh ← Yahweh; /xx: Jehovah;

“The name of God that in transliteration comes out YHWH (Yod-Hei-Waw-Hei),

but these are vowels (semivowels or consonantal vowels) Many believe that the four letters are
unpronounceable because these are consonants12.

Various examples of its pronunciation: (excl. those with ‘J’ and ‘v’ – all incorrect).

(A) Yehowah (a phonetically corrected form of 'Jehovah'. Similar to 여호와 ‘Yeohowa’ in Korean),
Iehouah (Geneva and Bishops)

(B) Yahuah (Cepher - http://cepher.net )

The first syllable is vocalized as Yah [vide infra] which is a short form of YHWH; often
seen in a number of theophoric names
Yahweh (favored by modern scholars) (yah-weh, not ya-hweh), a two-syllabled English word. [A
few English translations of OT, notably Jerusalem Bible.] – The first syllable is ‘Yah’ which itself
is a personal name of Elohim in a short form, as appeared in the word HalleluYah as well as many
theophoric names. (Cf. a similar-looking Hebrew letter ‫[ ח‬c]het or ḥet, as in Bach the German
composer, or Loch, Scottish word for a lake, a glottal aspirate.) For the part –weh, since English
letter ‘w’ is to be pronounced as ‘oo’, the form ‘Yahweh’ is actually incorrect English transcription,
inferior to ‘Yahuweh’. a
Yahuwah, Yahowah (Mowinckle etc.)
Yahoweh (Skilton, The Law and the Prophets, pp. 223-4),

Cf. http://youtu.be/wRsbSLU9oFA

• Gerard Gertoux, The Name of God Y.eH.oW.aH Which is Pronounced as it is Written I Eh

oU Ah: Its Story (2002 - 338 pages)
• Gerard Gertoux, The Name of God Y.eH.oW.aH Which is pronounced as it is Written
I_Eh_oU_Ah – Simplified Edition (2015 - 70 pages) ←
www.academia.edu/14029315/The_Name_of_God_Y.eH.oW.aH_Which_is_pronounced_as_it_is_Written_I
_Eh_oU_Ah._Simplified_edition download.

In Masoretic Hebrew Text of TaNaKh (Hebrew Scripture; so-called Old Testament) the
Tetragrammaton is usually vocalized as ‘Adonai’ with the most common pattern of vowel
pointing

QQ: Should the “semi-vocalic consonants” yod and waw be considered as vowels or as
consonants — ι or γ/γι, ου or β? Should the medial he rendered as χ or be simply dismissed,
considering it inherently voiceless? Should the divine name be transliterated (rendered letter
by letter) or be transcribed (by constructing proper syllables)? [fr. Pavlos Vasileiadis, "The
Pronunciation of the Sacred Tetragrammaton: An Overview of a Nomen Revelatus that Became a
Nomen Absconditus".] [See also Jože Krašovec, "Phonetic Factors in Transliteration of Biblical Proper
Names into Greek and Latin" http://old.hum.huji.ac.il/upload/_FILE_1474291991.pdf .]

There have been quite a number of suggestions; Traditional word ‘Jehovah’ is linguistically
archaic and anachronistic; it should be avoided as it does not represent accurately. [KJV 1611
‘Jehovah’ is in Early Modern English with j having y sound, and v from double u (v v). See
EE for J vs. Y here13]. Yehowah is a phonetically corrected form.

a
Ref: www.yahweh.org/publications/sny/sn09chap.pdf
158
 [See Appendix for further details on His name for its vocalization, different pronunciations,
meaning, as well as the issue of its NT rendering.]

[Cf. Hebrew word for Yahudah (> Judah) differs only by the insertion of a dalet ('d'). However,
it is not related to the name YHWH. The two are from different roots.]
[Cf. ‘Adonai YHWH’ has vowel points for Elohim to make YeHoWiH, a hybrid that combine
the letters of Yahweh's name with the vowel sounds of two other words: Adonai and Elohim.]??

Elohim (the God of the Scripture) has made Himself known with YHWH as His ‘personal’
name – Isa 42:8a ('I am YHWH; that is My name. And my glory will I not give to another,
neither my praise to graven-images.'; /xxx: the LORD - most); Exo 6:3 ('I appeared to
Abraham, to Yitzchak and to Yaakob as El Shaddai, but by my name YHWH I have not
made myself known.' /xxx: the LORD – most; /Yahweh – NLT!).

[It appears often as a combination of the name and the title, ‘YHWH Elohim’ (Gen 2:4; Exo 3:15;
4:5, etc.)]. It is customary in modern Judaism to use haShem (‘the name’) replacing of His name.

1. Masoretic text of Hebrew Scripture with various vowel pointing.

2. Compound names –i.e.
YHWH-Yireh (Gen 22:14).
YHWH-Tzeva’ot (Isa 1:9; 54:5; Rm 9:29; Jam 5:4) – YHWH of Armies/Hosts; (? ‘of
Commander-in-Chief’).
'The Adonai YHWH-Tzeva'ot (Isa 1:24; 2:12; 3:1, 15, etc.)
3. Short form –Yah
4. In combination – i.e. YHWH Elohim (‘LORD God’ – most; /’Jehovah God’ – ASV, NWT.
[cf. theophoric names – personal names embedding the name of a deity. In Hebrew with – el-
or -el; -yah/-yahu (suffix); Yeho-/Yo- (prefix), which is altered form of Yahu.]
5. Most English Bibles do not pay due carefulness to translate this name following their religious
tradition. Those doing consistently for OT are ASV, JB, NJB, NWTa, GW Names of God
Bible (2011), etc.
6. Early manuscripts showing Tetragrammaton itself in Hebrew letter within the Greek
translation (so-called LXX) of the TaNaKh.
(http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/rak/publics/2008sbl/text.htm)

It is a grievous error (succumbing to their religious tradition) to translate the God’s very name as
“the LORD” (KJV and others) in OT when they were supposed to translate the Scripture based on
the Hebrew text, not from LXX. Any name, if it is a name, is only to be properly transliterated and
cannot be translated.

a
Ref: http://tetragrammaton.org/divname.html
159
On transliteration in Bible translations

[Regarding the divine name, there has been a long history of arguments about (1) the correct pronunciation
accepted by scholars as the very name of God written in the Hebrew Tetragrammaton and (2) its meaning.]

Recently people became conscious of the Name in original language, reflecting in the efforts –

(1) YHWH to be rendered by transliteration, not by paraphrasing (e.g. as ‘the LORD’ in all caps) in
OT. This has been accomplished by several refutable Bible translations and there is not much argument
necessary, and
(2) the effort to bring the divine name into the English translation of the Greek New Testament text.
The letter is rather contentious from various reasons, including linguistic, grammatical and
denominational doctrinal. These are important to pay due consideration. However, equally or much
more importantly now, the focus should be, not just how to pronounce or transliterate correctly, and
how often the name should better use the name in our writing or speech, but for what the name is to be.
The name is to reflect the reality of the person — the identity, revelation, and authority. We who should
know our own father’s name dearly would and should refer him by name where and when things are
carried out in his name – calling upon his name. No one would ever call him by his name! It would be
a blasphemy. The Name is to be praised, honored and sanctified (Mt 6:9) and is to call upon. Having
been hung up by what the name is and ignoring what the name is for is a legalistic and cultic propensity.

When we say YHWH is His name, actually we do not mean that the four-lettered word is His name. As a
transcript of the Hebrew word it simply represents His name. With it He is represented. His name is NOT
same as His identity and reality – who He is – which is the greatest metaphysical and theological mystery. In
His self-revelation, He graciously made Himself known with His name (not ‘by’ His name). In the OT texts,
the so-called Tetragrammaton was found scribed in various ways and various scripts. a It was associated with
various vowel pointings (which gives different meaning). In LXX etc., it is transcribed into Greek in different
ways, e.g. IAO. How the Tetragrammaton was pronounced originally is the subject by itself. When the Hebrew
text is translated into different languages, it should be so transliterated as phonetically close as possible. It is
shown to be instead translated, even without any basis on the meaning, but substituted with a title, e.g. kurios
in Greek and its equivalent Lord in English. When the (original) text was read aloud (as the reading was oral,
not visual as with books in modern societies), how the Tetragrammaton should be read aloud, even if the
precise pronunciation was known? One principle to keep can be put into a question, ‘does the reader (Latin -
lector) honor Him, honor His name?’ when the text is being read. This point is aside from how properly
translate it in the text. Having the name translate does not mean that the readers of the translated Bibles are to
read out His name or are able to read it correctly. When no one in the human family would say out one’s own
father’s name whenever he is referred to, how much more our heavenly Father! The name is only to be spoken
out when it has to be clear that He is the one known with His name. It’s reverence to Him; it is for honoring
Him, it is from ‘fear’ of Him, it is from love of Him. All the more same, failing translating the name faithfully
and substituting with a generic title (Lord) of a non-scriptural word found in human society or indigenous
religion is dishonoring His name.

The sacred personal name of the very God in the Scripture. Elohim Himself revealed to be known
with this very name (not given by anyone; not that He was known as a god who has a ‘personal’
name.). It appears over 150 x in OT from Gen 15:7 through Exo 6:2 down to Mal 3:6 (161 x in
ASV; 154 x in NWT; also in a Catholic translation, Jerusalem Bible). For its pronunciation, see in
the Appendix toward the end of the file. It is composed of four semivowels (= vowel-consonantsb
– these are not consonants as often misunderstood). The name is not a mantra to use to invoke a
god as in paganism. It is used to refer to Him and identify Him – to acknowledge who He is. The

a
Reading material: http://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2014/08/18/writing-pronouncing-the-divine-name-in-
second-temple-jewish-tradition/
b
vowel-consonants – Josephus mentioned ‘phōnenata tessara’ (four vowels) for the Tetragrammaton. GEL
(1968, s.v.; and translations by Thackeray, Jos. III. Pe273, loc. Cit.; Whiston, Jos., p. 556, loc. Cit.
160
name (personal, singular, proper person name) is not to be used to call up or addressed to. The
name used frivolously is nothing other than a blasphemy. No one would, in our human language,
address one’s father by their name!a

Exo 3:11-15 -- The Divine Name

The name of God is more than just something for identity as is the case of a human person’s
name, but also for the reality behind the name. It is the revelation of God Himself. The
expression ‘name’ stands for who He is and what He is for.

The expression “shall know that I am YHWH” or “shall know that I am YHWH your Elohim”
appears 36x (mostly in Ezk 6:7ff – also in Exo 6:7; 7:5, 17; 8:22; 10:2; 14:4, 18; 16:12;
29:46; 1Ki 20:13, 28; 49:23; Jer 24:7; Joe 3:17), in addition to the phrases “I am YHWH”
(Exo 6:8 etc.) and “I am YHWH your Elohim” (Lev 11:44 etc.). Cf. ‘he who comes to Elohim
must believe that He exists" (Heb 11:6).

[See also for Personal Name of God under Appendix.]

Exo 3:11
But Moses said to Elohim,
“Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh
and that I should bring the sons of Yisrael out of Egypt?”
Exo 3:12
And to this He said,
“Certainly, I'll be b with you .
This is the sign for you [Moses] that I, I have sent you:
When you have led the people out of Egypt,
yoů all shall be worshiping the [very] Elohim at this mountain.”
Exo 3:13
Then Moses said to Elohim,
“Look, I, I come to the sons of Yisrael and say to them,
<Elohim of yoůr fathers has sent me to yoů,>
and they ask me, <What is His name>,
what am I to tell them?”14
Exo 3:14
Elohim said to Moses,

“Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh!” "I'm who I'm!" c 15

And He said,
“Say this to the people of Yisrael,
<Ehyeh I'm [who I'm] d 16 has sent me to yoů.>”
Exo 3:15
Elohim further said to Moses,
“Say this to the sons of Yisrael,
<YHWH [← 3:2; → 6:3] Elohim of yoůr fathers
— Elohim of Abraham,
Elohim of Yitzchak,
and Elohim of Yaakob —

a
[Cf. ‘call upon His name’ is a different idiom.]
b 3:12 I'll be ░░ [‫( אֶֽהְ יֶ֣ה‬LXX esomai) > I will be;
c 3:14 I'm who I'm ░░ [Ehyeh asher ehyeh] />> I am who I am; /xx: I AM WHO I AM – most;
d 3:14 I'm [who I'm] ░░ [ehyeh (I'm) is a part of the name YHWH. It is not 'I AM' nor 'I Am'.] /> I am; /xx: I AM – most;

161
 has sent me to yoů.>
This – YHWHa – is my name forever,
and this is how I shall be known
from generation to generation.

Ex 6:3 “And I appeared to Abraham, to Yitzchak and to Yaakob

as El Shaddai
but, by my name YHWH, [←3:14]
have I not known to them?!

[Cf. the verb ‘be’ in YHWH – see a full discussion on ‘egō eimi’ (> ego eimi). The verb in Greek
is a copula (a linking verb). In English the verb ‘be’ is for a copula or an auxiliary verb. By itself it
is not locative (cf. ‘there is’) or existential (cf. ‘be present’)
[To be read: Exo 3:1-17.]

http://demo.sheruyasodha.com.np/uploads/Bibliotheca_Sacra_142_565_%5BJan-
March_1985%5D_38-51.pdf [Charles R. Gianotti, The Meaning of the Divine Name YHWH,
Bibliotheca Sacra Vol. BSAC 142:565 (Jan 1985)]

To summarize, the name YHWH points to God's relationship to Israel in both His saving acts
and His retributive acts, manifesting His phenomenological effectiveness in Israel's history.
What God says, He will do. His Name promises that. And He will act on behalf of His people.
But YHWH does not ultimately limit the significance of His name to the children of Israel.
As Eichrodt succinctly states, "it is in the person of Jesus that the function of the Name of
Yahweh as a form of the divine self-manifestation finds its fulfillment". Truly Jesus is the
par excellence manifestation of God's active effectiveness in the history of the world! [≈
embodiment/incarnation of the word of Elohim (Jn 1:14)!]

As to the meaning of the Name it is to be found in the narrative context of the Exodus: Exo 3:12
‫‘ ־אֶֽהְ יֶ֣ה עִ ָּ֔מְך‬I shall be with you, Moses, all through this’ and Exo 3:14 ‫אֲשר אֶֽהְ יֶ֑ה‬
ֶ֣ ‫ אֶֽהְ יֶ֖ה‬Ehyeh
Asher Ehyeh ‘And Elohim said to Moses, <I am who I shall be [= the One who will act for my
people Israel]> (> ‘I am who I am’ - KJV) and said, “Thus you shall say to the children of
Yisrael <I am has sent me to yoů>, in reply to Moses’ question in v. 13 “See, when I come down
to the children of Yisrael, and say to them, <Elohim of your fathers has sent me to yoů>; and
they are going to say to me, <What is His name? What should I say to them?>”

Exo 3:14 – paraphrased

And Elohim said to Moses
“I am who shall be with His people.
Thus, you shall say to the sons of Yisrael
that the One who says I am [Heb. Yah] to be with them
has sent you.”
[The One – the Creator, the Revealer, the Restorer – who is to be with His people
– The one who is their Helper, Redeemer, Deliverer.]

‘I am who I shall be’ or ‘I am that I am’ is NOT the name of Elohim. Nor the English phrase
‘I Am’ (or even ‘I AM’) is the name for God, the Trinitarians have a penchant for it. It is the
meaning of His name. It is ‘the One who shall be’ [expressed in third person singular], the

a 3:15 YHWH ░░ [not referring to 'ehyeh' (I'm) in v. 14.]

162
One who acts in His redemptive history of Israel, is who He is. a TaNaKh itself was
exclusively written to His chosen people; it meant nothing to the rest of the world and would
remain such until the coming of Yeshua. Elohim Himself pronounced ‘I am the One’ [first
person speaker]; He was not calling Himself ‘I Am that I Am’ or Hayah. The word "hayah"
means "existed" or "was" in Hebrew; "ehyeh" is the first person singular imperfect form and
is usually translated in English Bibles as "I will be" (or "I shall be"). For example, at Exo
3:14. Ehyeh asher ehyeh literally renders as "I will be I will be". The short form name Yah
is in the first phrase ‘I am the One’. The word (name) means what it is; the meaning is not
the word (name). [Pharaoh will come to know His name; will come to know who He is.]

Note: This verb is not of ‘future’ tense as such [as the Hebrew language contains no tense
form s], but denotes a state of becoming – not a state of being (=existing) of Greek mindset.
Here the verb ‘be’ is not in existential sense of to exist on His own, but in the sense of His
being present in the midst of His people through the history of Israel, His chosen people. [Cf.
Jn 8:58 egō eimi b does correspond to the part of God as the speaker, but not to the meaning
of the name itself.] [Note: to read and take the sense of ‘existence’, ‘the being’, etc. (as LXX
renders as ὁ ὢν (ho ōn ‘the Being’) is from Greek metaphysical mindset of Greek philosophy,
which is foreign to Hebrew mindset. All this is evident within the narrative of the text itself
which shows that it is a reply to Moses’ question. The name of Elohim reflects His presence
with His people, not His ontological existence on His own [e.g. so-called self-existence,
which is oxymoronic. The very notion of existence is a human construct. The Creator is not
‘a being’ (as if one of many beings), nor belongs to the category of ‘the Being’.]

'The God' [Elohim] of the Scripture, a notion in Hebrew mindset, is not same as God of
Greek philosophy and God of modern Christianisms. He is the very God who acts and moves
with flow and radiating out (cf. there is no such thing as radiating or flowing in.) This is the
meaning of the expression ‘Elohim is spirit’ in *Jn 4:24 ('Elohim is as spirit' – IRENT) (>>
‘God is spirit’; /xxx: ‘God is a Spirit’ – KJV) – not ‘a spirit’ ‘a spirit being’ (like a ghost?).
It does not mean 'God is immaterial substance'. Here it is not used as countable nounc, nor is
a person, nor substance which God is supposedly made of. It is not a God who exists with its
very transcendent existence as its raison d'être. It simply means we know Elohim as spirit.
Nor Elohim = Spirit; nor Elohim = the Spirit. Nor a certain Spirit is God.

The holy spirit (or the spirit of the holiness) is the spirit of Elohim, not God the Holy Ghost.
Spirit is the mode in which God exists, acts, moves, flows, loves, creates. It is not something
immaterial, nor ‘force’ or ‘energy’. To live in God, be with God, in union with Him,
fellowship in Him – all in spirit, not in a ‘person’. Same for ‘with, by, and in Mashiah’ – it

a
[Thematically, it exactly corresponds to Immanuel (Mt 1:23).]
b
Gk. egō eimi (> *ego eimi) is rendered by some as '*I Am' (NLT, GNB) or, even 'I AM'
(ISV, New Heart English Bible, Jubilee Bible 2k, WEB), when the speaker was Yeshua, as
if capitalization is to make it as the name of God itself – same also in Jn 18:6. IRENT renders
it as 'I, I am', in most places to show the emphatic I, regardless who the speaker is in the
sentence. Other options are (1) 'I myself' (Tit 1:5); (2) I is separated from the verb by an
additional word, such as 'indeed', 'even', etc. The expression 'as for myself' is more of
concessional, than emphatic. Cf. In Korean, two different ways of having '나', the Korean
word for I, in as a sentence as a subject – '내가' vs. '나는'. The phrase on the lips of Yeshua
is common in G-Jn. Jn 10:7ff - [Ko. 내가 바로 (/곧); /나는 (v.7). vs. 내가 (v. 8)] [CJB 'I, I'
– e.g. Isa 45:18]
c
(e.g. ‘a spirit’, 'unclean spirits', etc.)
163
is, again, in spirit. Same for us – it is in spirit with our soul that we relate to Mashiah and
Elohim.]

164
His name is the revealed name by the God of Scripture Himself. Declared by Himself as ‘I am
YHWH’ throughout TaNaKh (Hebrew Scripture; ‘Old Testament’).

• YHWH – His personal name (Exo 6:3 ‘by my name YHWH’) [Cf. Isa 42:8. 54:5].
Cf. Adonaia
• YHWH Elohim – Gen 2:4; Exo 3:15, etc.
Note: ‘I am’ (either in ‘I Am’ or ‘I AM’) is not the name of Elohim the Creator, nor one of His
title. Nor is the descriptive title for 'God Jesus'. The erroneous idea is in the faulty theologies
(Jewish or Christian).

‘I am YHWH’ ‫הוהי‬

"This is my name forever;

this is how I am to be remembered
generation after generation …" (Exo 3:15 - CJB)

"I am YHWH; that is my name;

my glory I give to no other,
nor my praise to handmade image." (Isa 42:8)

And YOU will have to know that I am YHWH

when I deal with YOU for the sake of my name,
not according to YOUR evil ways
or according to YOUR corrupted deeds, O house of Israel,
says Adonai YHWH."
(Ezk 20:44) (Also 28:23, 25; 36:23, 25-28, 38)

“I am YHWH! And I had myself be seen by

to Abraham, Yitzchak and Yaakob
as El Shaddai.

And by my name, YHWH,

have I not known to them?!
(Exo 6:2-3; cf. 3:14) /x: they did not know the name
‘El Shaddai’ (> God the Almighty – descriptive title)

"Hear O Yisrael
YHWH is our Elohim;
YHWH is one, [one true Elohim].
Shema Yisrael (Deu 6:4 //Mk 12:29 - IRENT)

a
IRENT (of New Testament) renders Gk. anarthrous kurios as YHWH when the text shows it references to
Most-High Elohim and (2) where His name is to be revealed and honored. Elsewhere as Adonai after Masoretic
tradition of vocalization.
https://archive.org/stream/jstor-527403/527403#page/n0/mode/2up (pp. 154-156) The Divine Name Adonaj
[sic] and its History in Hebraica, Volume 7.
165
 The Name is to be revealed and revered. [Mt 6:9; Lk 11:2] Not to be hidden away or
shoved off, as many turn away and give no regard. When we come across His name, it
should not be taken nonchalantly. Nor thee name is to be taken lightly in a manner
unworthy to His name, in a manner of frivolity and blasphemy, as everything we have
hangs on it. [The name is to be known to bring and exercise the authority of the one who
carries it. No one who should know the name of one’s father would use the name to call
him, but only to call upon him.]

It holds true also for translation of the Greek New Testament, which faces different issues.
When the name was uttered through the mouth of Yeshua and was written in the Books of
Prophets, it behooves to see how the personal name of Elohim should be read and heard
by the readers reading in English also with the NT translations.

Every words and phrases we know will be set aside, but these names shall remain to
eternity.
"Revering [the name of] YHWH is
the beginning of knowledge:
but fools despise wisdom and instruction" (Pro 1:7)
[See below in the Appendix: for Revering the name YHWH.]

As in many Bible translations and in ecclesiastical tradition and practice, the name of the
true God remained almost buried. The result of such unmistakable intentional absence of
YHWH from Christian consciousness is manifold:
(1) tendency to focus on the person of Christ as the exclusive manifestation of deity.
Jesus has become, both in many circles of Christian piety, and in some academic
theology, virtually the whole horizon of the divine. [Cf. Worshiping Jesus as God (cf.
‘Jesusism’) – divine person, exalted risen Lord].
(2) Anti-monism, anti-Judaism, anti-Semitism (cf. Marcionism).
(3) syncretism and a universal God for every religion; as well as
(4) degradation of the Gospel of the Mashiah (> the Messiah) into various man-made
Gospels (e.g. Gospels according to different Churches, religions, e.g. Catholicism,
Pentecostalism, etc.). See *Christomonism.

166
Divine Title - ‘God’ ‘Elohim’

Elohim
Elohim [cf. El, Eloah, elohim]
'God' (Heb. H430 (2598x); Gk. theos) –it is not a name but a title or an entity. The most common title for
YHWH.a The Scripture clearly tells and claims that there is only one Elohim to worship (monaltry), not
there is one God (monotheism); not three but "*one God" [1Co 6:8; 1Tim 2:5; Jam 2:19; Mal 2:10 (el
echad)]
Hebrew words for *God –
H410 el (248x) – (Gen 14:18; Exo 6:3)
H426 elah – (Ezr 4:24) – Aramaic.
H430 elahim (2598x) – God (Gen 1:1); gods (Exo 18:11);
H433 eloah (60x) – singl. (Deu 32:15)

[biblical term] God vs. the Almighty God, the Most-High,

Ref.: www.eliyah.com/forum2/Forum1/HTML/002932.html [Etymology of EL, ELOI, ELAH, ELOH,

ELOAH, ELOHIM, and ALAH]

Elohim, which is plural form, of el, itself in OT is also used less commonly in several
different senses (singular as well as plural) to refer to human persons, angels, even to other
gods than the true God). 'Plural of Majesty' (Latin - pluralis majestaticus)

Eloah (H433); El – singular.

www.eliyah.com/forum2/Forum1/HTML/002932.html

Use of 'elohim' (which is plural form of el) in its basic sense ‘mighty ones’:
Exo 21:6 “His master shall bring him unto the judges [elohim].”
Exo 22:8, 10 “brought into the judges [elohim] ~~ come before the judges [elohim].”
Exo 22:28 “You shall not revile the gods [elohim – judges] – quoted in Acts 23.5
Ps 82:6, 7 “I have said, you are gods [elohim – mighty ones] – quoted by Yeshua in Jn 10:34-35)
Exo 7:1 “I have made you a god [elohim] to Pharaoh.”

Adjectival use of elohim ‘strong, great, mighty’ – 1Sam 14:15; Gen 23:6; 30:8;
Adjectival use of el – Ps 36:6; Ezk 32:21;
As adjectival noun use –Gen 31:29 (‘in the power [el] of my hand’)
As a metonymic use of the word Elohim - The Jacob’s altar was called ‘Elohim of Israel’ (Gen 33:20
‘Elelohe-Israel’)

Mt 22:32 "Elohim of Abraham and Elohim of Isaac and Elohim of Yaakob"

//Lk 20:37 (one definite article) //Mark 12:26 (one definite article; v.l. has all) – 'remote
article'
Act 7:32 – "Elohim of Abraham and of Isaac and of Yaakob"
Act 3:13 – "Elohim of Abraham and {Elohim} of Isaac and (Elohim) of Yaakob"

a
The title or entity 'God', a common English word, is also used for human beings within or without
the Bible. It has been used applied to 'Jesus' from early Church Christianity (→ 'God Jesus')
167
Gk. theos; ho theos;

English: ‘a god’; ‘a God’; ‘God’; ‘the God’ (which is rendered as ‘Elohim’ in IRENT
translation).

Latin: deus (Latin has no grammatical articles)

Greek words: pantokrator S3864

'Kurios ho Theos ho Pantokratōr' (Rev 4:8) x 8 in Rev; once in 2Co 6:18) – Note here,
anarthrous kurios = YHWH ('the LORD' – as in OT of KJV)]

Korean:

Note: those corresponding words in variety of languages, cults, or religions [allah, 하나님, 하느님, カミ
(kami; 神, 神様)] – All these are not names, but common descriptive words. Not even ‘titles’ by
themselves.

168
Mk 12:29b ‘Shema Yisrael’ ← Deu 6:4
[See a file Appendix - ((Mk 12.29 'one YHWH' or 'YHWH is one')) in the zip file IRENT Vol. III -
Supplement (Collections #3A.1 - God, Yeshua, & Names)

Deu 6:4 “… YHWH our Elohim; YHWH is one, [one true Elohim].” ← Shema Yisrael

‘Sh'ma Yisra'el YHWH Eloheinu YHWH Eḥad’ (6 words - no verbs);

Heb. echad H256, not yachid H3173 (only, alone)
LXX “kurios ho theos hēmōn; kurios eis estin” anarthrous KURIOS = YHWH in LXX; ‘the LORD’,
not ‘the Lord’;
‘YHWH as the only Elohim of Israel’??

Mk 12:29b “… YHWH is our Elohim; YHWH is one [true Elohim].”

Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ἡμῶν Κύριος εἷς ἐστιν,
YHWH the God of-us, YHWH one is,

Related expressions:
Deu 4:35 “… in order to know that YHWH – He is Elohim and there is no one else [to be your
Elohim].”
Isa 45:18 “Thus says YHWH, who created the heavens and Elohim himself formed the earth: ‘I
am YHWH and there is no one else [who created]’.”
Ex 20:3 “You shall have no other gods before me”
Isa 37:16 & 20b ‘you alone, O YHWH, are [the true God]; also cf.
Jos 22:35 LXX kurios ho theos autōn estin – ‘YHWH is their Elohim’

Jn 17:3 “… knowing You – the only, the true Elohim,

and the one whom You’ve sent forth [to give eternal life].
Jn 17:3 αὕτη δέ ἐστιν ἡ αἰώνιος ζωή,
This b= is the [very] eternal life
ἵνα γινώσκωσιν [/γινώσκουσιν] σὲ,
that they-may-be-knowing {/they-know} you
τὸν μόνον ἀληθινὸν θεὸν,
the only true God
καὶ ὃν ἀπέστειλας _ ((Ἰησοῦν, Χριστόν)).
a= whom you-sent-forth _ ((that is, Yeshua, Messiah)).
[monos – S3441 ‘alone’, ‘only’,]

169
God; Elohim, the God

[Collection of words, terms, and expressions – theos, el, elohim; a god, gods, God, the God, God-being,
deity (= not to be confused with ‘divinity’ ‘divineness’), a mighty One, the Almighty, the heavenly (king),
Godhead (‘head God’ or ‘head of God’?). Equivalent vocabulary in other languages, e.g. Allah etc.]
[Related vocabulary (adjectival, etc.) in WB #1] [Cf. ‘Triune God’ syn. of ‘Trinity God’ (‘God the
Trinity’??) is theological unbiblical jargon in the Trinitarian doctrine.]

(Kingdom reign of) the heavens’ Mt 4:17 – Judaic periphrasis for God. //the God (< Elohim) in Mk 1:15.
[Note: H8064 shamayim – one word is rendered as 'heavens' (Gen 1:1) or 'heaven' 'sky' (Gen 1:8, 28).]

“Elohim of Abraham, and Elohim of Isaac and Elohim of Yaakob”

Exo 3:6 → Mt 22:32 // Mk 12:26 //Lk 20:37

Psalm 63:1 [A Psalm of David]

O Elohim, you are my El; I'm seeking for you:
my soul thirsts for you;
my flesh longs for you
as in a dry, parched land where no water is there.

[H7836 shachar; /x: 'search'] [H5315 nephesh] [H1320 basar; 'flesh' /x: whole body]

Cf. Psa 42:

42:1 'As a deer pants for water streams
my soul pants for you, o Elohim
42:2 My soul thirst after you, the living El.
O, when will I come and appear before Elohim.

[H6165 arag 'pant'] [H6770 tsame 'thirst'] [H935 bo 'come'] [H7200 raah 'see', 'appear' /x:
meet – NIV]

170
God is a person?

When we say God is a persona, it is misleading. He cannot belong to the category of

'person' as is commonly used in English — a countable noun. He cannot be a 'person' –as
if he is one of 'persons'. He is beyond being of a person. He is not impersonal (e.g. 'he', not
'it' like 'Force' or 'Power'), but is ‘personal’ ('related as a person' with 'nearness', not
'personable') AND supra-personal (with 'Absoluteness').

Q: ‘what does it mean by ‘God’?

Q: ‘what does it mean by ‘person’?
Q: What is meant when we say ‘God is a person’?
Q: ‘God is a person’ vs. ‘God is as a person’
Q: What does ‘is’ mean?

[This is a series of question to be confronted whenever we make an opionated statement

(i.e. argument) which is put in the form of “A is B”, in order we can reach a mutually
agreeable logical conclusion.]

The notion of 'person' when used in association with the biblical 'God' (or rather 'Elohim')
is a mere anthropomorphic device. The God (Elohim) of the Scripture can be described
only as 'the Being', the Ultimate, or the Self-exiting One, not a person, whom we find to
have His existence understood only in being related to the creation.b

‘Most-High Elohim’ who has revealed Himself to be known as ‘YHWH’ as His own name
to be honored by His people [Mt 6:9b]. Like any name it has to be respected. The name is
used only for the purpose of identifying Him by the name, referring to Him, and having His
name revealed, the very name usually neglected, substituted, forgotten, kept ignorant (even
the fact that He has Name), and kept simply ineffable by most people in Judeo-Christian
tradition.

a
The Trinitarian statement itself does not define the word 'Person' (capitalized as if it does not mean 'person'
but something else) and used differently from it is as the common English word, being translated from of the
original Latin word ‘persona’ (in the sense of actor’s mask or role). Most English usage, the word is only used
when it refers to human beings or personification of non-human beings.] There is no [personal] name given to
a non-person such as the God’s sprit. Elohim is not literally a 'person' but is as a person.
b
Cf. 'I-Thou' or 'I and Thou' relation after Ich und Du, Martin Buber's German work of 1923.
171
"God as Father" vs. "God the Father";

<God as Father – a father figure>

Elohim as Father of Yeshua:

YHWH our Father [referent to 'our' is not same as in NT] [//Our Father – Mt 6:9]
‘You, O YHWH, are our Father’ –Isa 64:8
‘You, O YHWH, you are our Father ~~; you, O YHWH, are our Father, our Redeemer ~~ is
your name – Isa 63:16;
Cf. ‘YHWH ~ our Elohim’ – Isa 1:10

Cf. Elohim as 'my Father' /'your father' – father as to His Israel.

Jer 3:4 'call to me: My Father, my guide – KJV; /friend – NASB, ESV; / faithful companion
– NET; /companion – Israel Bible from my youth' (H441 alluwph chief Gen 36:15; Psa 55:13;
Pro 2:17; Mic 7:5);

Deu 32:6 'your Father [/(comma) /who made you his! - CJB; /and Creator – HCSB, NIV;
/possessor – YLT - ??] who has made /formed (H7069 qanah) and established (H3559 kun)
you, …' /Is not he your father that has bought you – Bethel; /Is not He the Father who created
you, Fashioned you and made you endure! – Israel Bible;

"as a compassionate father" – Deu 1:31; Psa 103:13; Jer 31:20; Mal 3:17
"you are the children of YHWH your Elohim' – Deu 14:1
"a son honors his father" – Mal 1:6
"as a father [YHWH reproves] the son in whom He delights" – Pro 3:12
Fatherly mercy – Isa 63:15-17 and 64:7-9;
'Israel is my son, my firstborn' – Exo 4:22;
'YHWH – the one who formed [Israel] – Isa 45:10-11;
'sons of living Elohim' – Hos 1:10;
'when Israel was a child, I loved him, and I called my son out of Egypt' – Hos 11:1;

[Ref. Larry Hurtado (2010), God in the New Testament Theology,

Ch. 2. Who is “God” in the New Testament? pp. 27-48. – ‘The Father’ pp. 38-42.
Also Ch. 3 “God” and Jesus in the New Testament pp. 49 72.]

The term ‘*Father’ is applied to YHWH Elohim (as 'Father' to Yeshua') - capitalized. Used in
figurative sense denoting a special relational term (cf. anthropomorphism and personification); it
is a title, not a name. It is a referent, not an identity (as is the way in Trinitarian language).
Labelling as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as if they are ‘persons’ is a doctrinal convention not
based on the Scripture. See '*father' in the file <Walk through the Scripture #3C - People and Persons>.

<*Father> is a term for a relational notion, not biological. Here, 'son' is son-of-man, a human
being, not demigod or God-man, or 'God the Son', the 2nd Person of Trinity God.

<*son>: A son of God, or son of God is figurative expression in Hebrew mindset; occurs
frequently in ancient and Greek-Roman mythologies, which including a deity begetting a deity.
Cf. Yeshua was a human being, a human person with human will, but not merely a human being,
172
but a 'divine man' (theios anēr). He became to be 'worshiped' as God → became 'Jesus is God'. 'To
worship God' means 'to worship as God' or 'to worship the one who 'is' God' – here we have to
agree what it means by 'to worship' and what is meant by 'God' – what God, which God, whose
God.
[cf. theios 'divine being';
theon 'the divine'; isotheos 'equal with gods'; theioi 'become divine'; athanatos 'immortal'; theia
dunamis 'divine power';
https://blogs.uoregon.edu/rel317s16drreis/category/divine-man/] [Hick (1977), The Myth of God
Incarnate – 5. Two Roots or a Tangles Mass? – Frances Young, p. 100.]
[Cf. '하나님 아버지a' vs. '아버지 하나님' (usu. only in vocative). Note: different word order in Korean
from in English.
[Cf. 하나님, 한울님, 하느님, 천신天神, 신神]
[cf. godfather of Catholic lingo],
'character' 'nature' 'essence' 'substance' 'ousia' 'hypostasis' – Trinitarian lingo.

Father; our Father; your Father; my Father – Mt 6:9, etc.

O Father – Mt 11:25; Lk 10:21; 11:2;
O my Father – Mt 26:39, 42;

Matthean unique expression:

• (the) heavenly Father [> Father the heavenly ho Patēr ~ ho ouranios] (your ~ Mt 5:48; 6:16, 26,
32); (my ~ Mt 15:13; 18:35); (the ~ Mt 11:13);
• (the) Father who is in the heavens (our ~ Mt 6:9); (your ~ Mt 5:16, 48 v.l.; 6:1); (my ~ Mt 7:21;
10:33);
• (the) Father who is in heavens (your ~ Mt 5:45); (my ~ Mt 12:50; 18:10, 19);

God our Father (Theos Pater hēmon) 2Th 1:1; Col 1:2; Phi 1:2; Eph 1:2; 2Co 1:2.

God the Father ['Elohim the Father', not 'God the Father', 'God Father', or 'Father God'b, but 'God as
Father'] 2Jn 1:3; 1Th 1:1; 2Th 1:2; 1Tim 1:2; 2Tim 1:2; Gal 1:1; 1Pe 1:2; Col 1:3;
Cf. 'God the Father' – one of three or more 'Gods' in Trinitarian lingo – along with God the Son, God the
Holy Ghost, and Trinity God.
Cf. 'Elohim and the Father of our Lord Yeshua Mashiah' 1Pe 1:3 ho theos kai Pater tou Kurio hēmōn Iēsou
Christou
‘the Father, Elohim’ (nominative) Jn_6:27; (/the Father, God – NASB; /God the Father –
most;

• ‘to Elohim the Father’ (Gk. to the God and Father) – (dative - appositive)
1Co_15:24; Eph_5:20; Col_3:17; Jas_1:27;
• ‘Elohim the Father’ – in the Epistles, anarthrous, other than nominative
(genitive) Phi_2:11; Jud_1:1; 1Pe_1:2; dia ~ Gal_1:1; en~; 1Th_1:1;
apo ~ Gal_1:3; Eph_6:23; 2Ti 1:2; 1Ti 1:2; Tit 1:4; 2Jn_1:3; 2Pe_1:17
• Elohim the Father of our Lord Yeshua Mashiah’ – (nominative; appositive)
Rm 15:6; 2Co 1:3; 11:32; Eph 1:3; Col 1:3; 1Pe 1:3
• ‘Elohim ~ Father of our Lord Yeshua Mashiah, the glorious Father’ Eph 1:3
• Elohim of our Lard Yeshua Mashiah, the Father of glory – Eph 1:17

a
아버지 vs. 아버님 in Korean.
b
E.g. <Father God, you are good. … > https://odb.org/2018/08/05/hard-mysteries/
173
 The OT describes Elohim as 'our Father' of his people in a few places:
Isa 63:16 'you, O YHWH, are our Father
Isa 64:8 'O YHWH you are our Father'
1Ch 29:10 'YHWH, Elohim of Israel, our Father'
Elohim as a father figure – the notion of 'Fatherhood of God'
( https://hrcak.srce.hr/file/250901 )
Jer 3:19 I said, thou [YOU people – NWT] call out to me, 'My Father'
Jer 31:9 'I have become to Israel a Father'
Deu 32:6 'Is he not your Father who has produced you …?
Mal 1:6; 2:10 Pro 3:12; Psa 103:13

God's name– Robert George 'Trinity's Weak Links Revealed' -- p. 75

Isa 63:16; 64:8

Father of our Lord, Yeshua Mashiah (Eph 1:3),
Elohim, Father of our Lord, Yeshua Mashiah (Eph 1:17; Col 1:3; 2Co 1:3; 11:31)

One God and Father (Eph 4:6)

God as Father: the Father in the heavens (Mt 5:16; 6:1, 9; 7:11; 10:32, 33; 16:17);
you are sons of Father (Mt 5:45)

"you are my son" (Psa 2:7 Heb 1:5; 5:5; Act 13:33)

God as Father: [theou – genitive – rendered is IRENT throughout as 'God's' for anarthrous; 'of Elohim' for
the arthrous.]
• 'God's sons' (Mt 5:9; Lk 20:36; Rm 8:14; Gal 3:26)
• 'a god's son' (Mt 27:54)
• 'God's children' (1Jn 3:1, 2; Rm 8:16; Phi 2:15);
• 'the children of Elohim' (Jn 11:52; 1Jn 3:10, 5:2; Rm 8:21; 9:8);
• 'the sons of Elohim' (Rm 8:19);
Cf. 'Elohim has given me the dear-children (Heb 2:13 – paidia)
Cf. '*adoption' – [see in <WB #1 Words, Words and Words>.]
*Abba, Aramaic for ‘father’. It does not mean ‘daddy’ (a children’s vocabulary) as many know-
it-all claims. The expression, Elohim as ‘Father’ and the son of Elohim, it tells about special
intimate relationship as is seen between Father and the Son; it has nothing to with a biological-
social notion (e.g. misunderstood by Muslims). [e.g. www.livingwithfaith.org/what-does-abba-
really-mean.html ]
Yeshua addresses Him always as Abba in Aramaic, not as 'God', or 'Lord'.] Jn 11:41; 12:27,
28; 17:1, 5, 11, 21, 24, 25; Mt 6:9; 11:25; 26:39. 42; Lk 10:21; 11:2; 22:42; 23:34, 46 [compare
'father!' for other than Elohim – Lk 15:12, 18, 21; 16:24, 27, 30]
In Greek text, Yeshua himself addressed to him as 'Abba' (Mk 14:36),a not Gk. patērb. The
followers of Yeshua have a privilege to address Him likewise as in the Lord's Prayer [Lk 11:2;

a
also by the believers in Yeshua - Rm 8:15; Gal 4:6 ‘Abba Father!
b
= Latin pater, which is commonly used as a title for a Catholic priest. It is etymologically remote
from 'Pope' (in classical Latin, 'tutor'). [modern Gk. papas 'priest']
174
 Cf. //Mt 6:9] The Aramaic word 'Abba' in GNT – Mk 14:36 (by Yeshua); Rm 8:15; Gal 4:6 (by Paul)
– all in vocative addressed to Elohim;

[Note: The expression 'my Elohim, my Elohim' in Mk 15:34 //Mt 27:46 is a phrase in the direct quotation
from Psa 22:1.] No one else did as Yeshua in the whole Bible.

• First, about the very common word ‘*god’ in English and its equivalent in different
languages – various meaning, sense, and usage (detonation and connotation). The
semantic field of these words differ in different languages and cultures. We need
categorize before going into detailed arguments (Cf. ‘God theology’).

It may be thought of a transcendent being of some sort. Though it may incorporate

certain aspects as we find in the Bible, this is actually a typical vocabulary of Greek
philosophy and well fit in religions, philosophies, and science. It may not be related to
the biblical God concept. Note: 'The God' in this sense belongs to the confine of a
concept of ‘eternal’ or ‘supernatural’ but ‘supra-eternal’ or ‘supra-natural’. Most of
theological talk dumbs it down to be manageable level of theological doctrine.

We are, however, are necessarily concerned with only the word that which is used in
the Bible. It would be of Hebrew concept. The basic sense of this biblical word, which
is be applicable to every context and accepted by everyone would be ‘a mighty one’
(though to grasp what sense to be ‘mighty’ it may not be simple). At the risk of falling
into circular definition the phrase ‘mighty one’ would a ‘god-being’ (someone or even
something). What this word means and refers to in the particular context will determine
how and what specific sense it is used (e.g. whether it is ‘God’, or ‘god’, etc.).

• Next, about the concept of god (rather, god-being). God as a word, an idea, and an object
and then the reality. The God cannot be a static concept (a substance or a being taking
up a position somewhere), the self-existing one for that matter. The God that exists itself
would not carry any relevance to humanity. It can be only of a relational dynamic
process of ‘becoming’ in act (of creation). One may find their ground of being in a God-
being, but God is as, but not = (equal to), one’s Ground of Being.
(cf. www.doxa.ws/Being/Being2.html Paul Tillich; also in Robinson (1963), Honest to
God – their definition of God may not be same as in the Bible, but a metaphysical and
religious idea. Their “humpy-dumpy language” gives an entire new meaning to the
words.
http://churchsociety.org/docs/churchman/101/Cman_101_3_Burrows.pdf)
One’s mental image of God is hardly coincides the Ultimate reality. Our God has
become too small (fit into an Aladdin’s lamp); easy for us to analyze and manipulate to
serve our wish, want, and will. [Note: when people say ‘God’, it is often not more than
an image of God, a God of their idea, or even a generic God (a God-being; an external
transcendent being; often personified), not the Ultimate reality. In truth, God is one’s
existential alter egoa (which is of the dark side of human reality) Unless this alter ego
is replaced by the true God, it is de facto a Satan. A Satan is not an external agent, force,

a
‘existential alter ego’ – alter ego (Latin, "the other I") – as another aspect of the self, in the dark
side of human reality (not ‘of human soul’), which is supposedly toward the ne plus ultra man, an
ideal Superman (Übermensch in German philosopher Nietzsche).], rather than as a ‘structural alter
ego’ used as a psychological term for a second self which is believed to be distinct from a
person's normal or original personality – cf. "sub-consciousness", altered consciousness,
multiple or split personality disorder.]
175
 power, or a sprit being as a fallen ‘angel’. This enemy is us and in us, not someone we
can blame or explain all the evilness of the world.

It is essential to know what the English word ‘God’ is and is not. It is a common English
word of Germanic language origin. It is in the indigenous vocabulary of primitive religious
setting and became to be used to render Latin deus (> Gk. theos); just as the Hebrew word
el was originated from the indigenous Canaanite language.]
The word ‘God’ is the English Bibles is merely a translation word for Gk theos and Hebrew
Elohim. By itself it is not ‘the true Elohim (God’) of the Scripture, only the context tells what
is referred to – which God. All these equivalent words – God, theos, Elohim, Allah, 하나님,
하느님, (천주 天主 – Korean Catholic word), 神, 上帝, etc. – are not ‘name’ of
someone/some being/some person, but a common word with a basic sense of ‘mighty one’.

Hebrew word el (LXX – theos; god - English). Elohim, the Hebrew word with plural suffix,
is used as a grammatically singular to designate the one and only true God. The same plural
form is used as a singular noun in the sense of ‘a god’ or ‘a god-being’. E.g. elohim (LXX –
theoi; gods) applied to Moses (‘I’ve made you a god to Pharaoh’– Exo 7:1), while it is used
as ‘gods’ in Psa 82:6 (= quoted in Jn 10:34); also to refer to angelic beings in Psa 8:5 (=
quoted in Heb 2:8) [/angels – LXX, NIV, KJV; elohim – MT; /x: God – ASV, NASB; /x:
heavenly beings – ESV; /x: (less than) divine – ISV]; [Note: another example of a Hebrew
word in plural form functions always as singular – chayim (‫‘ חַ יִּים‬life’ – Gen 27:41; Job
10:12).] . Also, plural word ‘gods’ to designate Judges. In these instances, it reflects the very
presence of God.

Ref: the followings are attached to this WB #3 as ‘On Jesus as God – Gk. theos’
• Murray Harris, Jesus as God: The New Testament Use of Theos in Reference to Jesus
(2008). [See book reviews on www.amazon.com/Jesus-God-Testament-Theos-
Reference/dp/160608108X ] [download from
www.scribd.com/doc/148032436/Murray-J-Harris-Jesus-as-God-the-New-Testament-
Bookos-org]
• https://bible.org/assets/powerpoint/wright_jesusasgod.pdf

It should be emphasized that, though it is often used as a title, this common English word
‘God’ is not a name, nor it should be thought of or used as a substitute for the name.17 It
denotes *what God is (i.e. *God-beinga; of referencing), but not *who God is (i.e., of reality).
[‘identity’ = ‘reality’+ ‘reference’] [Note: ‘what God is NOT’ is no less important than ‘what
God is’.]

Hence, without the Name revealed and called upon, all the titles of God may well be applied
to other than the very God [YHWH Elohim] of the Scripture. Such ‘God’ when people speak
may well be any other god than Him. A number of issues concerning the divine names and
titles are discussed further along in this writing, always pointing to their relevancy in
translation work of the Scripture. How futile does it become when someone is being known
by titles, even such as ‘Lord’! (Mt 7:21-22).

The same holds true with the corresponding Greek word theos and the Hebrew word Elohim.
[God is the English translation word of the Greek, which is in turn a translation word of

a
‘God-being’ – not necessarily a countable noun.
176
 Hebrew word.] When Greek NT refers to the God of Scripturea, it is the arthrous ho theos
‘which would have been accurate and precise to render it as ‘the God’. However, such is
difficult to accept because of the usage and convention in English. [This is how IRENT
renders consistently as Elohim.] [Cf. Problems in different languages. b]

It is not possible to remove the English word "God" completely from our biblical language
and from English Bible translation (of NT) simply because of its being pagan-origin, simply
also because idol worshippers claimed the same title for their idols - or any other title for
that matter. All the attributes of YHWH have been identified with gods and idols of pagans
and mythologies! But that surely does not earn YHWH the attributes of gods – in pagan idols
and icons and mythologies!

However, the problem is that ‘God’ as the English word which appears in the Bibles does
not sound different from the same word used in dealing with other religions and used in non-
religious speeches, even as an expletive people absent-mindedly spit out. Even written as
capitalized, the word ‘God’ by itself is not much different than God of generic notion.
Anyone can take God as ‘God’ which is made in their own image. [Cf. ‘ohmigod’ (or, is it
‘oh my gosh’). We read ‘My God and My God’ as Yeshua utters on the Cross where He was
quoting from Psalm.c

An important thing to be achieved by rendering ‘the God’ (the arthrous Greek word) in NT
as ‘Elohim’ is to reestablish direct connection to Elohim of OT for the impact which is
linguistic as well as theological and liturgical as well as spiritual. This will remove all
connection to other God-beings or generic God ingrained in the minds of people and will
purge them of all fanciful and frivolous God-talks. This is surely as important and weighty
as the effort to reveal and revere the personal name of God (YHWH) restored in the New
Testament translations. When we see everywhere in our families, neighborhoods, nations,
truth is being perverted in every aspect of human activities and endeavor, pressing on is time
for people to come to know the truth all the more urgently in these last days to be freed from
all those in power in the world – politics and religions. Marana tha!

a
The arthrous ho theos, the God of the Scripture, does not coincide conceptually and
doctrinally with ‘God of the Bibles’ or ‘God of Religion or Church’. [It would be, however,
impractical for English convention to have it rendered as ‘the God’.]
b
In 1937 the traditional Korean word ‘hananim’ (하나님, comparable to God) for ‘God’
took over hananim (with a of Old Hangul) to comply with the unified orthographic standard
of Korean. The Joint Version (Protestant-Catholic) of Korean Bible (‘Common Translation’
공동번역, 1971) discared this long-accepted word and chose a more generic ‘haneunim’
(하느님, comparable to ‘god’), causing a great controversy. Ref. Sung-wook Hong (2008),
Naming God in Korea – The Case of Protestant Christianity. (pp. 99-104). The word
하나님 is treated as if it is Korean name for God! as is indicated in the title of the book. God
or hananim is not a name, but a mere referent or title. Misuse of the word ‘name’ itself in
English is common: e.g. ‘many names of God’ etc., in which the word name is actually
nothing but a descriptor, an epithet.
c
Mk 15:34 - Here it is arthrous nominative ho theos (the God) - ‘Elohim’, not ‘God’. In //Mt
27:46 it is anarthrous vocative thee – here IRENT renders it also as Elohim. In both places it
is translation word - of Aramaic Eloi (for G-Mk) and of Hebrew Eli (for G-Mt), the latter
those standing around apparently misheard as ‘Eliyahu’ (Mt 27:47).

177
 As one of the distinguished points of IRENT translation, when the Hebrew loanword is
utilized as a translation word for the arthrous word in IRENT, it offers a few advantages
from the linguistic and literary viewpoint for the readers of the Bible: a
(1) it dispels any image formed by the word which is usually used in the sense of generic
Godb without specific reference to the God of the Scripture;
(2) it removes any confusion over the word God when it is used in Christian religions
by putting on Jesus (as God in Trinitarian mindset);
(3) it makes impossible to use the word as an expletive in our English speech; and
(4) it offers a clean and uncomplicated solution to help distinguish the two for
translation and interpretation purpose, without being partial to different doctrinal and
theological positions.c

‘God’ by the Trinitarians

www.angelfire.com/space/thegospeltruth/TTD/topics/godgodgodgodgod.html
1. Father is God. What Father? What does it mean by ‘Father’ when not in biological
sense? Which Father? What God? Which God?
2. Son is God. What does it mean by ‘son’? What son? Which son? Whose Son?
What God? Which God? God to be worshiped alongside the Father God? On which
throne He is?
3. God the Holy Ghost. What God? Which God? Any name? On which throne? To
be worshiped? To be prayed to?
4. God the Triune – Triune God. Trinity God with no name? What God? Godhead?
God-family? Which God? The only God to be worshiped?
5. God the divine nature

So-called Triune God is not a God, nor a 'Person'; it is a theological construct which
is composite of Father, Son, and Spirit – equivalent to 'Godhead' or God family,
typical tritheistic.

a
It has nothing to do with the positions of the so-called Sacred Name Movement or Hebrew Roots
Movement, which translates the Bible to shows many words of Hebrew origin - both in OT and NT
b
– everyone and every religion believe God and believes in God, but nowhere clear-cut and self-evident
as to what such God is, which God over others, or who God is. Even God the atheists are up to is God of
religions and ever God of their own creation God.
c It becomes noticeable where they are shown in the text for contrasting each other - a singular example
is in Jn 1:1, where in both places the word is translated as God in most English Bibles. Among many ways
it is rendered, one alternative is ‘v. 1b Elohim ~~v. 1c God’. [Note here in this last case, ‘Elohim’ is not
acceptable translation word for v. 1c.]
178
*worship God

[what does it mean by 'worship'? what does it mean by 'worship someone' or 'worship a
god'? What does it mean by 'true worship'? ‘worship other than God, too’? What is
meant by ‘God’ when we say ‘to worship God’?

Cf. 'worship Father in spirit and in truth” (Jn 4:23) – not ‘worship God’, or worship the
only God, or worship Trinity God.

In OT, worship → 'offering sacrifice'.

In church lingo – 'worshiptainment' (http://concerningthetimes.com/worship-or-
worshiptainment/ ) [Quote: Aiden Wilson Tozer, "The church that can't worship
must be entertained. And leaders who can't lead a church to worship must provide
the entertainment."

When some say 'God' – may not have anything to do with YHWH Elohim.]

If someone or something is worshiped, it may be worshiped as God, regardless whether

it is in fact ‘God’. God may be said something or someone ‘worship’ (with the word
carrying a special sense). [God in the sense of generic God is an object (someone or
something) people ‘worship’? Worship is something to do to God? – Circular logic.]
[Cf. prosekuneō ‘to worship’ (used often in a blanket fashion) vs. ‘to give (pay/bring)
homage to’ ‘to bow down before’ ‘to prostrate oneself before ~ on one’s knees’ (in the
act of); ‘/x: to obeisance to’ (a quaint word for use as a translation word - NWT). Cf.
sebomai; latreuō]

Word study: Hebrew

H 1288 barak – kneel (Psa 95:6); bless (Gen 1:22 God blesses); praise (Gen 14:20 God
be praised);
H7812 shachah – bow down Psa 72:11
H8416 tehillah – praise Psa 22:3,
H8426 todah – thanksgiving Psa 50:23
H3034 yadah – 'to thank' 'praise' 'confess' 2Ch 20:21
H1984 halal – 'shine' 'praise' Psa 150:1;

Zamar – To touch the strings, to make music with instruments, mostly rejoicing
Clap [H8628 taqay] Shout [H7321 rua] – Psa 47:1

179
'God' to worship

That there is one God as the Bible texts say, can only mean that ‘one and only God to
worship by His people’. It has nothing to with how many gods we come across or create
or find. Biblical monotheism is nothing other than monaltry or henotheism. Cf.
Jehovah’s Witnesses – two gods, one Almighty and another mighty.

Mormons – polytheism – all Mormons themselves become gods, what does ‘god’ mean?
Most Christianisms with Trinitarianism – de facto tri-theism (worshipping to the
‘Trinity’ - God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost; praying to them – to
each of them, in whose name??). The triune statement (as in two places Mt 28:19; 1Jn
5:7b v.l.) does not mean it is a Trinitarian statement. God in NT is triune, not Trinitarian.
(triune -- triad in unity).

Divinity, deity, Godhead, Divine nature (2Pe 1:4; Rm 1:20), Divine person, etc.: That
‘God is divine’ is an oxymoron. Cf. ‘God is holy’ – vs. set-part, sacred. Anything or
anyone may be said ‘divine’ – the English word does not have much to do with the
biblical ‘God’, Elohim.

Trinity formula: "There are three persons in the Godhead. God the Father, God the Son,
God and the Holy Spirit are in the Godhead. One in three." – what does it mean by
'person' 'Godhead'? Biblically 'God the Father' is a confession, not the reality. Biblically
'son of Elohim' (Son of God) is a confession in faith; it as not 'God the Son' in Trinitarian
2nd person, 'equal' to God the Father – what does it mean to 'be equal'? Father and Son
are one – what does it mean to be one? Just add 'the Holy Ghost' in this line of lingo!
Linguistic illogicality is simply discounted. Irrationality is attributed to its
comprehensibility – taken as a 'mystery', pulling the wool over their own eyes.

180
B. Yeshua
The Name in the Scripture NT:

Yeshua the Mashiah

Mashiah, Messengera, Message,

Mission, Mighty Works, Mystery b

Iesous Christos (Yeshua haMashiach)

Yeshua ░░ ‫ֵׁשּוע‬
ַ ‫ י‬Yeshua [H3442 (e.g. in Neh 8:17) H3443 (e.g. in Ezr 5:2)]
← shortened form of Yehoshua H3091 ('Yah is salvation') (Exo 17:9)
Not same as 'Jesus'.

Mashiah ░░
(Messiah) [S5547 (538x). christos; Heb. mashiaḥ; 'anointed']

a = Apostle' (Heb 3:1) ≈ God's prophet,

b 'mystery of Mashiah' (Col 4:3)
181
*Mashiah ░░
(Messiah) [S5547 (538x). christos; Heb. mashiaḥ; 'anointed' (to inaugurate into the
service of Elohim as a Davidic king, prophet like Moses (Deu 18:15-10) or priest
(in the line of Malki-Tzedek Psa 110:4; Heb 7:17)] [not same as '*Christ' – a church
lingo]

1. (a) ‘an anointed one’ – Jn 1:41; 4:25;

(b) ‘the anointed one’ – Heb 11:26 (Moses – ‘the God’s anointed leader’);
2. (a) Mashiah, e.g. Mt 1:16 (‘Yeshua who is called Mashiah’); Lk 2:11 (‘a savior
who is Mashiah, Lord’); Lk 23:2 (‘a Mashiah, a king’); Jn 4:25 (‘the one who is
called Mashiah’); Jn 9:22 (‘confess Him to be a Mashiah); Act 2:36 (‘Lord and
Mashiah’); Gal 4:19 (‘Mashiah is in you’); Gal 2:20 (‘in me is Mashiah’); Rm 8:10
(‘Mashiah is in you’); Rm 8:9 (‘spirit of Mashiah’;
(b) the Mashiah e.g. Mt 1:17 (‘until the very Mashiah); Mt 11:12 (‘works of the
very Mashiah); Lk 22:67 (‘you, you are the very promised Mashiah’); Act 5 42
(‘Yeshua is the Mashiah’); Act 9:22 (‘this is the very Mashiah’); Act 2:32
(‘resurrection of the Mashiah’); Act 3:18; 4:26 (‘the very Mashiah of Him’); Act
8:5 (‘proclaim the very Mashiah); Act 17:3; 26:23 (‘the very Mashiah had to
suffer’); 1Co 1:16 (the testimony about the very Mashiah – i.e. Yeshua); Eph 3:17
(the Mashiah dwells); Jn 1:20, 25; 4:29; 7:26, 27, 31, 41, 42; 10:24, 27; 12:34;
20:31 (the very Mashiah’);
3. as an appellate for Yeshua
– Iēsous Christos (‘Yeshua as Mashiah’ or ‘Yeshua the Mashiah) ↓
– tou Iēsou Christou (Mt 1:18 ‘of this Yeshua as Mashiah’.

Yeshua as Mashiah – in the Gospels

the Anointed one by Elohim to be a royal Davidic king for Israel – long-awaited
and promised to come. [cf. Act 5:42 'proclaiming good-news about the very
Mashiah having come in the person of Yeshua.]
[In the Gospels, the phrase Iēsous Christos occurs 5x.
Mt 1:1, 18 v.l.; Mk 1:1; Jn 1:17; 17:3. Not in G-Lk]
[As Mashiah king (Mt 27:11, 22; Jn 18:33) He was to be put to death];

Yeshua the Mashiah – outside the Gospels

Beyond the figure of Mashiah the one anointed as a Davidic king and as a prophet like
Moses (Deu 18:15-19) but as the only-begotten Son [of Elohim] [Jn 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18;
1Jn 4:9; 5:18] – as declared the Son [Mt 3:17 //Mk 1:11 //Lk 3:22 [in his Immersion by
Yohan]; Mt 17:5 //Mk 9:7 //Lk 20:70 (in His transfiguration); Heb 1:5; 5:5.]; /xxx: the
God the Son.
→ '*Jesus Christ' of the Church Christianity (Christianism) of the 'Christians' (= the label
which was put on the gentile Mashiah believers in late 30's CE in Antioch – Act 11:26)

Mashiah Yeshua (Christ Jesus): in Pauline Epistles

182
 Yeshua the Nazarene in the Scriptures = not 'Jesus' of 'God Jesus' of 'Jesus religion'.

Though OT points to him and a figure of him pictured in OT, the person of him is not in OT.

What is He? Who is He? What was He? Who was He? to whom?

Yeshua, the 'only-begotten' son of Elohim – 'begotten Son', not 'unbegotten God [the Son]'.a

Mashiah, the Anointed One in holy spirit by Elohim; (Isa 61:1)

the genuine human person – divine human; the very presence of Elohim in him.
Embodiment of Elohim's presence with His people (Mt 1:23) for His Kingdom ['Immanuel']
Embodiment of the Word of Elohim (Jn 1:14; Cf. 1Tm 3:16) ['Incarnate Word', not 'God Incarnate'];
Embodiment of the fullness of the state of divine being (Col 2:9);
Embodiment of the love of Elohim (Jn 3:16; 1Jn 4:18ff);
Embodiment of the salvation from Elohim (Lk 2:30; 1:69; Act 13:23).
All authority in heaven and on the earth is given to him by His Abba, YHWH Elohim (Mt 28:28;
1Co 15:27)

Yeshua? Jesus? What Yeshua? Which Yeshua? Whose Yeshua (Jesus)? Yeshua the Nazarene?
Yeshua, the man, mediator God and man, or Jesus who is God, a God-man, demigod? Jesus miracle
worker? Yeshua the Risen Lord? Yeshua who is on the right hand of Elohim? Pre-human Jesus?

a
https://youtu.be/EV7-IAFlzKk <What Did Arius Really Believe?>
183
In His name:

‘the very name of Yeshua’: Mt 28:18; Phi 2:9-11 (exalted); Eph 1:15-22

"And indeed, in no one else

there is the very salvation [to be found],
for there is no other name under the heaven beside his.
that has been given among mortal humans
by which we must get saved." (Act 4:12)

9 "For this reason, indeed, Elohim has highly exalted Him

and bestowed on Him
the namea that is above every name.
10 that at the very name Yeshua, everyone shall kneel down
— those in Heaven, on earth, and under the earth,
11 and every mouth shall openly-confess

that Yeshua Mashiah is ‘Lord’ b

— to the glory of Elohim the Father. [Phi 2:9-11]
"But the Helper — the spirit of the holiness
which the Father will send in my name —
that one will teach yoů all things
and bring back to yoůr mind
everything that I, I have told yoů." [Jn 14:28]
[Cf. “the name of the Lamb and ~ the name of his Father
written on their foreheads” – Rev 14:1.]

a
v. 9 'the name' – here, synecdoche of 'authority' → Act 4:12.
b
'Lord' – the title for the risen and exalted Mashiah. = 'Lord of Life'; not simply 'Master' as it was
for his title in the Gospels, e.g. the Master for his disciples.

184
The name of Yeshua:

Acts 2:38 …be baptized in the name of Yeshua Mashiah

Acts 3:6 …In the name of Yeshua Mashiah of Nazareth, rise up and walk."
Acts 3:16 …And His name, through faith in His name, has made this man strong
Acts 4:7 …By what power or by what name have you done this?"
Acts 4:10 … by the name of Yeshua Mashiah of Nazareth, …this man stands here before you
whole.
Acts 4:12 …there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be
saved."
Acts 4:17 …speak … in this name." 18 … teach in the name of Yeshua
Acts 4:30 … signs and wonders may be done through the name of Your holy Servant Yeshua."
Acts 5:28 …teach in this name.
Acts 5:40 …speak in the name of Yeshua, 41 … to suffer shame for His name.
Acts 8:12 …proclaimed the things concerning the kingdom of Elohim and the name of Yeshua
Mashiah,
Acts 8:16 …been baptized in the name of the Lord Yeshua.
Acts 9:14 … call on Your name." 15 …bear My name before Gentiles, kings, and the children
of Israel. 16 … suffer for My name's sake."
Acts 9:21 …called on this name
Acts 9:27 …proclaimed in the name of Yeshua.
Acts 9:29 … spoke boldly in the name of the Lord Yeshua
Acts 10:43 …through His name, whoever believes in Him will receive remission of sins.
Acts 15:14 … to take out of them a people for His name.
Acts 15:26 …risked their lives for the name of our Lord Yeshua Mashiah.
Acts 16:18 … I command you in the name of Yeshua Mashiah to come out of her."
Acts 19:5 … baptized in the name of the Lord Yeshua.
Acts 19:13 … call the name of the Lord Yeshua
Acts 19:17 …the name of the Lord Yeshua was magnified.
Acts 21:13 … to die … for the name of the Lord Yeshua."

185
Yeshua – the name

*Yeshua ░░ >> ‘Jesus’

S2424 Iēsous (923x)

1. Yehoshua, son of Nun – Act 7:45; Heb 4:8

2. Yoses, son of Eliezer – Lk 3:29
3. {Yeshua} Barabbas – Mt 27:16 v.l.
4. Yeshua Justus – Col 4:11
5.
(a) Yeshua [Iēous or ho Iēsous] > Jesus
(b) Yeshua as Mashiah; Yeshua the Mashiah > Jesus Christ
(c) Mashiah Yeshua > Christ Jesus
(d) Lord Yeshua the Mashiah > Lord Jesus Christ

Heb. ‫ ישוע‬Y’shua = a short form of Heb. Yehoshua (meaning ‘Yah is salvation’)

/x: Yahshuah; /x: Yahusha; /x: Yahoshua.

Yeshua (Yeshu) > Yeshuah > Yehoshuah --Aramaic vs. Hebrew]a

→ Gk. Iēsousb → /Jhesu – Wycliffe (1384), Luther (1534); /Iesus – KJV 1611c,
Geneva, Bishops, Latin; /*Jesus d - (modern) English, Spanish, French, etc.;

Like any person name in NT it is arthrous 'ho Iesous' (the Yeshua). In the Synoptics a
few places it appears as anarthrous, 'Iesous' (Yeshua).

Mt 1:16 ("Yeshua was born"); Mt 1:21 ("His name Yeshua")', Mt 1:25 ("called His
name as Yeshua"); Mt 21:12 ("Yeshua entered"); Mt 28:9 ("Look, Yeshua met
them"); Mk 1:9 ("Yeshua came from Nazareth"); Lk 2:43 ("Yeshua the boy"); Lk
3:23; 24:15 (Yeshua himself); Lk 4:1 ("Yeshua full of holy spirit"); Lk 9:36 ("found
Yeshua alone"); Lk 18:38 ("Yeshua the Nazorene"); Lk 22:48 ("Yeshua said to him")

In G-Jn, Yeshua is frequently anarthrous:

Jn 4:2, 44 (Yeshua himself); Jn 2:24 (Yeshua, on his part); Jn 1:48, 50; 2:19; 3:3, 10;
4:1, 10, 13, 47; 5:1, 15; 6:3, 15, 24, 42, 43; 7:14, 21, 39; 8:1.

a
Ref. John P. Meier (1991), A Marginal Jew, p. 205-6; The Origins of Jesus of Nazareth – 1.
What's in a name?
b
(the terminal s in Gk. is for singular nominative ending of a masculine noun)
c
Iesus in KJV 1611 has it with the letter ‘J’ as a Gothic font for the capital letter ‘i’. The sound
value of the modern ‘j’ came into use in English thereafter being influenced by Romance
languages.]
d
The word 'Jesus' is not related to the word 'Zeus', a Greek deity = 'Jupiter', a Roman deity]
www.sacredname.com/Q-and-A/The-Jesus=Zeus-Myth.html
186
*Yeshua vs. Jesus
[The simple fact is that no one ever would be recognized as ‘Jesus’ until only about four centuries ago with
beginning of Constantine Roman Christianism.]
Proper names should not be translated; they can only be transliterated, as close to the original language
pronunciation. There is no reason why he should be called ‘Jesus’, pronounced in English as ‘JEE-zus’ (accent
on the first), except ignorance and neglect on the significance of a person’s name. The name IS the person.
No one was ever called ‘Jesus’ there and then in the 1st century. In Act 26:15 the risen Lord showed ‘Yeshua’
as His very name to introduce Himself. His name could not have been other than ‘Yeshua’. [Note: the word
‘Jesus’ does not appear in the English translation NT text of IRENT. Whenever the word ‘Jesus’ appears here,
it should be understood as ‘Jesus as they call’ or ‘Jesus [sic] as quoted from others’ writing.]

Though the name ‘Jesus’ in English does point to the person of ‘Yeshua’, the image which the name in English
carries varies considerably among different people in various Christianisms (sects, denominations, churches),
traditions, culture, history and languages.
His name in the Scripture is Yeshua.a There has been no one called ‘Jesus’ as it is pronounced (as well as
written) until less than four hundred ago in English. What used to be ‘Iesus’ as in the earliest English
translation got metamorphosed to ‘Jesus’ as the English language evolves and changes in its phonetics as well.

'Yeshua' (of faith) 'Jesus' (of Christianisms)

In the NT
In history w/ Hebrew mindset
Was one of the Yehudim – Torah keeping
Father – Yosef from the seed of David
Elohim as his father
a genuine human, a man (1Tm 2:5)
/human person
with human nature
in the Scripture (NT)
A mediator btw God and man,
having come in flesh (1Jn 4:2)
the *only-begotten son of Elohim (Jn 3:16, 18;
1Jn 4:9)
Born of a woman under the Law (Gal 4:4)
Born to be "King of the Yehudim" (Mt 2:2).
A deliverer – a Mashiah, the Master (Lk 2:11)
(born to be) the son of Elohim (at baptism)
The Master → The risen & exalted Lord
– the son of Elohim – the spirit.
Incarnate Word (Jn 1:14) – embodiment of the
Word of Elohim – as the bread of the Life from
the heaven – his 'flesh' to be partaken.
the Lord – after resurrection, ascension and
exultation (Phi 2:9); Yeshua as the Mashiah
In the Bibles and in the Church teachings
In history w/ Greek & Western mindset
Was a 'Jew' but not 'Jewish' – beyond Torah
Father – no human father. (God? Holy Ghost?)
'God the Father' is separate person; not as his Father.
God-man or demigod.
/divine person, not human person,
with human and divine 'nature' 'essence'
repackaged from the Bible NT & OT.
'fully God and fully man' (a god disguised as a man?)
Jesus = 'God' ('God Jesus', one of the Trinity God)
[For some dimwits] 'Jehovah' of OT = 'Jesus' of NT
Born of '(Ever) Virgin Mary'
Born "King of the Jews" (KJV)
A savior who is Christ the Lord
(pre-existent) God the Son
The "Lord" → the risen & exalted Lord
– God the Son – 2nd person of Trinity God.
God Incarnate; Incarnate God the Son – came down
from the heaven, put into the womb of the virgin.
+ 'God manifest in flesh' (1Ti 3:16 corrupt v.l.)
'the Lord' – for Jesus during His ministry and for
Jesus resurrected; "Jesus = Christ" "Jesus = God"

a
An alternative is Iesu, which is from Greek without the terminal s, is adopted in some languages, e.g. Latin, Welsh,
Japanese. In three syllables 'I-e-su', it is simple to replace 'Jee-zu-s' in hymnal without affecting diction.
'Yesu' is in Korean etc.
187
 NT translations which restores the Hebrew names for 'Jesus' and 'YHWH':
• David Stern (1989), Jewish New Testament – 'Yeshua' (cf. In OT, 'Adonai' for the Tetragrammaton)
• GW Names of God Bible (2011) – 'Yeshua' in NT; 'Yahweh' in OT;
• The Sacred Scriptures (Bethel Ed) (1981) – 'Yahshua' in NT. 'Yahweh' in OT and NT (rendering
'theos' as Yahweh as well);
• The Delitzsch Hebrew Gospels (2011) – 'Yeshua' & 'HASHEM' (Heb. 'the name').

Jesus of Christian religions (synonymous with 'Christ') is not same as Yeshua of the New
Testament. 'Christ' of Church (Greco-Roman) is not same as 'Messiah' (< 'Mashiah') of the
NT, which is not same as 'Mashiah' of OT. Semantic field (meaning/usage) overlaps but not
superimposes.

The word 'Jesus'– etymologically from the variant of Heb. ‫ ישוע‬Yeshua (with vowel pointing
ַ‫ – י ֵׁשּוע‬yēšūă‘) [a variant of ‫( יהושע‬Yehoshua)] → Gk. S2424 Iēsous to Latin Iesus → Iesus (KJV
1611) → Jesus (with 'J' – Gothic font for the capital letter for 'j' of 'y' sound) → Jesus (with 'j'
for 'j' sound). www.quora.com/What-is-the-phonetic-pronunciation-of-Jesus-in-ancient-
Aramaic

Similar to 'Iehouah' in KJV 1611 → 'Jehovah' after 1670. [Unrelated to 'Z' of S2203 Zeus.]

/Jesus/ is a theological construct, repackaged from the Bible to form the religious image of a
person. Thus, there is not one but many of 'Jesus' as each one believing Jesus of one’s own. In
IRENT translation of the NT His name is rendered as ‘Yeshua’, faithful to His original
Hebrew name, not as ‘Jesus’ in the tradition of Constantine Roman Christianism.
As to /Jesus/, no one can be sure of which Jesus and what Jesus, each arguing for 'who he is'
as their theologies present and used in variously – in 'preaching' 'proclaiming' or 'peddling',
whereas it is 'who he was' as the New Testament presented.
The Mashiah (Messiah) person in the NT is the one believed as the very Mashiah who, in the
OT, was promised to come. He is not same as the Mashiah (Messiah) of the rabbinic Judaism,
nor as the Christ of the Christian religions.
Historically Yeshua the Nazarene would be one of many messiahs appeared in the Second Temple
period. As for those believed in Him in the NT. He was believed to be as the very Mashiah promised
to come.a

Yeshua vs. Jesus

This name [Gk. onoma] itself is not a special, nor sacred name. It was one of three most
common Hebrew names for boys. However, when we refer to this name, he is Yeshua Mashiah
(God’s Anointed (see below) one for a position of king-prophet-priest).
One's name does NOT change from one language to another, other than phonetic variation. The
name Yeshua may be pronounced as Yesu, Iesu, etc. but not Jesus of modern pronunciation. (It
was pronounced as Iesus/Yesus until mid-17th century. See elsewhere on the history J.)
Likewise, Yaakob is not 'James', which is a completely different name.
(

a
‘descriptive’ on ‘equative’: E.g. (1) Yeshua Mashiah = 'Yeshua as Mashiah' or 'Yeshua the Mashiah'; (2)
the son of Elohim = Yeshua as the son of Elohim; (3) Yeshua the Word of Elohim = Yeshua as the Word
of Elohim.
188
*Mashiah vs. *Christ
S5547 christos (538x 'anointed one' a ‘Mashiah’ which is translation from [H4899
Mashiach (39x) 'anointed one' 'a Mashiah (figure)']
The word 'Mashiah', which reflects Hebraic notion, is used throughout in IRENT as the translation
word for Christos. Note. In two places (Jn 1:41; 4:25) in the Greek NT text we have the
Greek transliterate S3323 Messias, which appears in the explanatory sentence within the
narrative. See below <S3323 Messias and vs. S5547 christos>.

Hebrew word Mashiah, Mashiaḥ (Messiah) (H4899 "anointed one") (Christos in LXX as in
GNT) refers in the Bible to a number of people – Israelite kings, and at times to high priests
(Lev 4:5), and even prophets (1Kg 19:16).b

Gk. '*Christos' in NT is a translation word of Heb. Mashiah ('Messiah') c which means an

anointed one by YHWH Elohim as for a king, prophet, or kohen (> priest) with priestly,
kingly, prophetic authority. Yeshua as a Mashiah was when he anointed with spirit of
Elohim at his 'baptism' (Mt 3:16-17 //Mk 1:10:11; //Lk 3:21-22; Jn 1:29-34)

In majority, it is arthrous ho Christos (the anointed one; the Mashiah). In small number
of places, it is anarthrous – an anointed one, which again most renders as ‘Christ’.

https://youtu.be/7Qu_PXldP24 <Your Bible says King David was God's Christ>

[ See below on the word ‘* anoint’.]

www.messiahalive.net/ Joseph Viel. [Yohanan the Baptizer came to the scene as the forerunner of
this Mashiah. As in the Bible translations, the word Mashiah, Messiah, or Christ is a title, not a name
– a descriptive of his role and position.

See below for the fixed phrase of <Yeshua + Mashiah> → "Yeshua as Mashiah" (in the
Gospels – anointed one as a Davidic king to come for Israel) or Yeshua the Mashiah (outside
the Gospels – anointed as a Savior of the world).

a
‘anointed one’ - it would border on etymological fallacy to translate the Greek Christos in wholesale
fashion as ‘the Anointed’ as done in some translations. But, if ‘Christ’ means ‘anointed one’, what does
‘anointed one’ mean? Without the full context of the word in the Scripture, it does not say much to say
‘Christ’ means ‘anointed one’.
b
The Israelite King as Messiah: (David – anointed – became the king): 1Sam 2:10; 16:3, 12-13; 2Sam 2:4,7;
3:39; 5:3, 17; 12:7; 19:21; 22:51; 23:1; Psa 2:2; 28:8; 45:7; 89:20; 132:17. [Concerning Solomon, see 1Kg
1:39, 45; 5:1; 2Ch 6:42] The 'Messiah' figure in the restored Israel.
c
spelt as Mashiaḥ, Mashiach, Moshiah, Moshiach, Mashiaḥ) meaning both ‘anointed’ (mashuach) as well
as ‘anointer’ (moshiach). 'Mashiah' is unrelated to Heb. moshiah (deliverer/savior 1Sam 14:39 ha-moshiah
> H3467 yasha 'to deliver' Exo 14:47). [cf. H6403 palat (25x) 2Sam 2:2; Psa 17:13]
189
(2) In majority, it is arthrous ho Christos ho Christos (x 20).

(A) IRENT renders it consistently as 'the Mashiah' throughout NT and if emphatic, as ‘the
very Mashiah’. See EE here for the list.18

‘Mashiah’ is a Hebrew concept, not like ‘Christ’, a church lingo. It is in this very sense of
the word used in the Gospels, not as 'Christ' of Church/Christiansa. Most Bibles translate it
as 'the Christ' or simply ‘Christ’ (e.g. in KV). Many do not keep the definite article for
English translation at all.

When not in direct reference to ‘Jesus’ or ‘Lord’, the word should not be read synonymous with his
title as in the full phrase ‘Jesus Christ’.

Act 18:28 'to show by the Scriptures the very Mashiah to be Yeshua himself'
Act 18:5 'testify to the Yehudim the Mashiah to be Yeshua himself'
Act 9:22 ' by proving that this [Yeshua] is indeed the very Mashiah'
Jn 20:31 'may believe that Yeshua is the very Mashiah, the son of Elohim'
1Jn 2:22 'denies that Yeshua is the very Mashiah'
1Jn 5:1 'believes that Yeshua is the very Mashiah'
Act 19:4. {the Mashiah} Yeshua

As to G-Jn it does not concern on His Messiahship as such – The word ho Christos (Jn 1:20, 25,
41; 3:28; 4:25, 29; 42; 6:69; 7:26, 27, 31, 41, 42; 9:22; 10:24; 11:27; 12:34; 20:31) is used
for a Mashiah figure, the one expected/promised to come, not as the title for Yeshua, except he one
place 20:31 it is used as a title for him. f

(B) In small number of places, arthrous ho theos is rendered as 'the anointed one', when the
word itself in the text is there to explain its meaning itself, rather than being used as a title:
• Mt 23:10; ('the God's anointed leader' – in reference to a Mashiah figure)
• Heb 11:26 ('the God's anointed leader' – in reference to Moses)
• Jn 1:41 eurēkamen ton Messian ho estin methermēneuomenon 'christos'
Jn 4:25 Messias erchetai ho legomenos 'christos'
- 'anointed one'. Note: Here in these 2 places the Greek word Messias (S3323) appears
– a transliterate of Heb. word. IRENT renders it as 'MASHIAH' in all caps and
bracketed with single quotation marks.
• Act 3:18 [‘the anointed one of Him (Elohim)’ – in reference to a Mashiah figure.]
• Act 4:26 (His God's anointed one) (from Psa 2:2) "against YHWH and against His
Anointed one [ - NAB, ESV, NIV, RSV; /Messiah - NRSV; /xxx: Christ – KJV,
NASB, NET]

a
For the word 'Christians', see <Walk through the Scripture #3C - People and Persons>.
190
(3) anarthrous Christos; a

with no definite article or any other modifiers (such as Lord or Yeshua)

(A) In a few places: IRENT renders as ‘anointed one’

Jn 1:41; 4:25 (- in reference to Yeshua); /Christ – NASB, ESV, NET; /xx: the Christ – NIV,
KJV, NKJV; /Anointed One – HCSB;
Jn 6:69 v.l. ('a God's anointed'). /x: the Christ – NKJV; /xxx: that Christ – KJV).

(B) as 'Mashiah' (for a title); or 'a Mashiah' (as a Mashiah figure, e.g. Jn 9:22); once as 'the
Mashiah'b.
Mt 26:68 'You, O Mashiah' (vocative)
Mt 27:17, 22 'Yeshua, the one who is called
'Mashiah'
Mk 9:41 'are Mashiah's
Lk 1:50 …who is 'Mashiah' — 'Master'
Lk 23:2 'he himself is a Mashiah, a king
Jn 9:22 'confessing Him as a Mashiah'
1Co 1:17 'Mashiah did not send me'
1Co 1:23 'proclaim Mashiah crucified'
1Co 1:24 'Mashiah, God's power
1Co 1:30 you are in Mashiah
Rm 5:6, 8 'Mashiah died'
Rm 6:4 as Mashiah was raised up from
among the dead.
Rm 6:8 'died with Mashiah'
Rm 6:9 'Mashiah, being raised from the
dead, will never die again'
Rm 8:9 'Mashiah's spirit' {/x: the Spirit of Christ}
Rm 8:10 'If Mashiah is in you'
Rm 8:17 'fellow heirs of Mashiah'
Rm 9:1 'the truth, ~~ I speak in Mashiah'
Rm 10:4 'Mashiah is an end of [the demand of] the law'
Rm 10:6, 7 'to bring Mashiah down ~ up'
Rm 10:17 'Mashiah's utterance'
Rm 12:5 'we are one body in Mashiah'
Rm 14:9 for this end Mashiah died and lived (/x: again).
Rm 14:15 for whom Mashiah died.
Rm 15:8 Mashiah came as a minister for those of brit-
milah rite.
Rm 15:18 what Mashiah has accomplished
Rm 15:20 not where Mashiah was already named
Rm 15:29 blessing of Mashiah
Rm 16:5 convert to Mashiah
Rm 16:7 who were in Mashiah
Rm 16:9 our fellow workers in Mashiah
Rm 16:10 approved in Mashiah

a
Vide supra – anarthrous Gk. christos (uncapitalized; not used as a title) appears in the meaning of
its root 'an anointed' Jn 1:41; 4:25, etc.
b
In one place 1Co 8:11 as ‘the Mashiah’ for smoother English diction -- “for such brother the Mashiah died
too!” – without a comma delineation, it can be misread as ‘brother Mashiah’).
191
(4) It is often in fixed phrases:

A. 'Iēsous Christos' (113x. anarthrous). In the Gospels it is in the sense of "Yeshua as Mashiah"
(a Davidic king to come for Israel); outside the Gospel as the risen Lord as the Savior, it is
'Yeshua the Mashiah']
B. 'Christos Iēsous' *Mashiah Yeshua (x 58).
C. (our) Lord Yeshua Mashiah (85x);

Vide infra for * Concordance – 'Yeshua as Mashiah' 'Yeshua the Mashiah' 'Mashiah Yeshua'.

S3323 Messias vs. S5547 christos;

Note. In two places (Jn 1:41; 4:25) in the Greek NT text, we have the Greek transliterate
S3323 Messias, a transliterate of Heb. Mashiaḥ, ‫מׁשיח‬. The Evangelist wanted to reflect the
Hebraic character of the speaker's words. Most renders as Messiah as Gk. Christos is
rendered as 'Christ'. In IRENT it is rendered as ‘MASHIAH’ in all cap and bracketed with
quotation marks.
…

Jn 4:25 ... Messias erchetai, Jn 1:41 ... ton Messian

((ho legomenos Christos)) ((ho estin methermēneuomenon [ho] Christos))
/the Mashiach will come /the Mashiach!
who is called Christos – Delitzsch which in Greek Christos – Delitzsch.
/Mashiach is coming /the Mashiach !
(The word means "one who has been anointed") – JNT
(that is, the one who has been anointed') – JNT
/the Messiah will come
/Messiah will come
fn. Translated this means 'Anointed One' (Christos) – ONT
fn. The one called Christ (ie in Greek. Ed) – ONT
/the Anointed One is coming, the Anointed One!" (which is translated "Messiah")- ISV.
who is being called 'the Messiah' – ISV!!;
/Messiah is coming” the Messiah (which means, when translated, Christ) – NWT
who is called Christ – NWT
/Messias cometh, the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ. – KJV
which is called Christ: - KJV
/the Messiah will come. the Messiah " (which translated means Christ). - NASB
He is the one we call Christ. – CEV; the Messiah” (which is translated, the Christ). - NKJV
/I know the Messiah is coming the Messiah!" (which is translated Christ). – NET
—the one who is called Christ. – NLT the Messiah" (that is, the Christ). – NIV
/Messiah is coming the Messiah” (which means “Christ”). – NLT
(he who is called Christ) – ESV the Messiah” (which means Christ). - ESV
/Messiah is coming the Messiah!" (which means "Anointed One") – HCSB,
(He who is called Christ) – NASB
/Messiah is coming”
(who is called Christ) – NKJV, HCSB
/Messiah is coming"
(the one called Christ) – NET;
/Messiah" (called Christ) "is coming – NIV
/the Messias cometh
(who is called Christ); - Douay

192
 The word 'Christ' in our everyday English usage is a religious lingo; the 'Christ of
Christendom' is synonymous with 'Jesus' and as his title it come to the hearers as his
surname. It is not same as 'Christ' in the English NT translations which is of different
sense from 'Mashiah of the NT, which in turn is not identical with the notion of
'Mashiah' in OT [https://youtu.be/3OnwZIuFjwA at 00:00:00]
The statement 'Jesus is the Christ' is tautological, being 'Jesus' = 'Christ', and does not bring out what
it means, i.e. 'He is as the Mashiah, the long-promised one, the expected Mashiah to come as the
anointed by God for a David royal king, priest, and prophet in the Second Temple Judaism (in the 1st
century CE).

There are several persons described as 'God's anointed one' in OT of 'the Mashiah' figure for which
biblical scholars of Judaism and Christianity all agree. Those referents in OT, which Judaism does not
see, are taken by some Christians, though they don't agree among themselves, as proof-texts for their
figure of 'the Christ' of Christianisms. The full-fledged Trinitarian Christ of Church is the Christ of
Chalcedonian formula, further refinement of Christ of Constantine Roman Christianism (of the
Nicene Creed). a Semantically, literarily, historically, and theologically 'Christ' is not same as
'Mashiah'. Esp. Christ of Christendom who has to be and is claimed to be virgin-born CAN NOT be
qualified for the Mashiah of OT and NT.

https://youtu.be/LBSRiwy4T7k <THE REAL MESSIAH Part 1: Why He Is Not Jesus>

www.youtube.com/channel/UC5qG9wUJNISCbVF8AVp7-xw

The Mashiah figure in the 1st century of Judaism and the Yehudim:

[Ref. Moishe Rosen (1982) Y'SHUA: The Jewish way to say Jesus.]

[Cf. In the Gospel 'the Mashiah' is in reference to “the Mashiah who was [promised/expected] to
come” (e.g. Yeshua as Mashiah, the promised one to come (in the figure of Davidic king) (as in Rm
9:5). This should not be confused with the sense of “Mashiah who came” (as Yeshua the Mashiah).

Often the Gk. Christos is rendered as ‘Christ’, e.g. Jn 1:41 KJV, ASV, NET and many, where it
should be rendered as ‘anointed one’ (not even as ‘Mashiah’ > ‘Messiah’), the very meaning of the
word the text tries to prove. If rendered as ‘Christ’, the intention of the text is altered and made
nonsensical oxymoronic tautological statement ‘Jesus is Christ’.

He himself did not say he was the Mashiah or a Mashiah, but accepted his disciple’s confession that
he was the Anointed One of Elohim, the promised One to come, a Mashiah-king figure.
• Lk 9:20 (‘the Anointed one of Elohim’);
• //Mt 16:16 (‘the Anointed One, the son of Elohim the living One’);
• //Mk 8:29 (the Anointed One). - i.e. ‘the promised One to come’.
[Here not the Gk. ho Christos is not as his title. />> the Mashiah; /xxx: the Christ.] [Yeshua never let it
be known openly that he was the Mashiah, until His hour came here as the narrative moves towards the Passion
Week. Mt 16:20] [He is beyond the Davidic royal Mashiah for Israel, to overthrow the Roman power]

a
/Nicene_Creed the First Council of Nicaea 325 CE [Homoousios and Homoiousios /Homoiousian vs.
/Homoousion debate; concerned with Binitarian, not trinitarian issue which was later to come to deal with in
First Council of Constantinople (381)] [451 CE /Chalcedonian_Definition 'truly God and truly Man' with
two natures.' – 'Jesus who became Christ'
[Cf. /2n_Council_of_Nicaea restored icon-veneration.]
193
The word 'Christ'a as an English translation word of the Greek has lost its original meaning and usage. The
word is almost exclusively used and understood as the title for 'Jesus'. Now, 'Christ' is the 'Christ' of
Christianisms, the 'Christ' belonging to Christian church'. with unfortunate connotation of the unbiblical
idea of the 2nd Person of the Trinity God. More than that, the word by the majority refers to the Second
Person of the Trinity God, that is 'God the Son', which is a new notion matured in the 4th c. Constantine
Roman Christianism. In most Christian language 'Christ' is often treated as synonymous with 'Jesus' and
taken as if it is his last name, with 'Jesus Christ' as his full name (with the first and last names).

It is anachronistic, confusing and misleading especially in the Gospels to have it translated as ‘Christ’, since
the word by itself is now used in reference to none other than Yeshua himself, as if it is sort of his last name.

It is not same as 'Mashiah, the son of Elohim' which NT presents, which is in turn thematically divergent
from the Messiah figure in Hebrew Scripture. Etymologically (as reflected as a translation word),
historically (with evolving Christology through Church history), and linguistically (in the way the word is
used in common English), these two, 'Mashiah' and 'Christ' are connected but not identical, nor same. No
one would take it in the original sense of a Messiah figure in the OT. In short 'Christ' of Christianism
(religions and churches) is NOT same as 'Mashiah' in the NT.

In NT, Yeshua was born to be the Mashiah [Lk 2:12], not to be 'Christ'. He came to be believed as Mashiah,
the long-awaited, the promised one to come from the seed of David, hence he is 'Yeshua Mashiah', which
is not same as 'Jesus Christ' of Christian construct of various and diverse Christianisms.

A basic principle of translation process is to make sure that the words should mean the way they were meant
to the original author and audience, not the way the word is used by the modern readers/interpreters with
tendency of exegesis. So-called literal translation has not fared much better than non-literal translation. By
rendering it as ‘Mashiah’ such a misunderstanding is effectively removed when He is accurately and
properly and accurately called ‘Yeshua Mashiah’ – linguistically and literarily with the name to be properly
transliterated closely keeping the original pronunciation.

It is Christologically important to distinguish the notion of 'Mashiah' in the New Testament. It does not
correspond to that of 'Christ' of the Church in Greek mindset. Now alienating itself from the Hebrew root it
presents a different 'Jesus'. 'Jesus' of Christian churches has no human father, being effectively disqualified
to be a true human; who cannot be the 'Mashiah' the promised one who is to be from the seed of David.b He
has been made God, has become God, and is being called or labelled as 'God', whatever the word God means
in their confused mind – for a religion of 'God Jesus'. He is labelled as God the Son (2nd Person of Trinity
God), contracting the biblical proclamation of Yeshua to be the son of Elohim. Not only they got their
Christology confused but, in turn, they have to make the theology (what and who God is) upside down.
What they present is a tritheism, but denies that they have three Gods.c

a
Cf. Karl Rahner - 'Christ' - The ‘absolute bringer of salvation’ in a radical sense. Different from royal and
priestly Messiah in OT Judaic dispensation. [Note: The word 'Christ' – is unrelated linguistically to the word
Krishna a Hindu god.]
b Mashiah being David’s Son from the seed of David. Cf. Mt 22:41-46 {//Mk +12:35-37a; //Lk 20:41-44}. If Yosef is not
his father, Yeshua cannot be Mashiah. He can only be Jesus with a title of 'Christ' for Christian religions which is nothing
to do with Mashiah (Messiah) of OT & NT.
c The have More than one 'God' de facto – God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Ghost, and Trinity God, etc. Note

that God the Holy Ghost (= God the Holy Spirit) and the Trinity God do not have a person name (personal name). They
would not worship or pray to the Holy Ghost, though supposedly being a person. A throne is for the Father; another one
is for the Son, but no throne is allocated to the Holy Ghost. This has caused linguistic and religious confusion on the
notion of God-being they believe and worship. they have in their vocabulary. [See on the problem of 'Trinity', a non-
biblical notion; a theological term for the man-made doctrine evolved infused with Greek philosophy during 2nd and 3rd
c. CE.]
194
 Note: Very few verses have a bearing on the question of Yeshua’s Messiahship in the Synoptics – in
so-called ‘Messianic Secret’a (Mt 16:20; Mk 1:34; Lk 4:41) and in the Yehudim’s questioning (Mt
26:63; Mk 14:61; Lk 23:2, 35, 39). [Cf. Mt 24:5 ‘saying I’m the Mashiah’]

Translation word 'Messiah' in NT translation for Christos:

Re: HCSB www.bible-researcher.com/csb.html
http://atpreston.wordpress.com/2012/08/23/a-new-translation-of-choice-the-hcsb/ - also for Messiah
vs. Christ in NT translation
“… the term word “messiah” occurs 529 times in the New Testament. The HCSB renders
Χριστος as “messiah” 116 times in the NT, compared to the ESV, which uses the term only
twice (cf. Jn 1:41; 4:25). For the HCSB, maintaining the transliteration of “Christ” occurs
when the name of the Lord (i.e., Jesus) is emphasized or the specific context has Gentiles in
mind (e.g., Eph 1:1 — “Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus”). However, where Χριστος occurs
within Jewish contexts, “messiah” is employed (e.g., Eph 1:12 — “…we who had already put
our hope in the Messiah.”). The objective behind the increased use of “messiah” is to help the
reader connect Jesus with the messianic expectation, which is progressively anticipated
through the storyline of the Old Testament. This substitution of “messiah” in Jewish NT
contexts seems to be another positive cue from the interpretation committee to help modern
readers connect Jesus with the whole canon of Scripture.”

Ref. Joseph Fitzmyer (2007), The One Who Is to Come, [esp. Ch. 1 – The Term “Messiah” (pp. 1-7)
and Ch. 8 – The Use of Messiah in the New Testament (pp. 134-145).] [– a copy of Ch. 1 is found in the
folder <'Yeshua' & 'Mashiah'> in the zip file <IRENT Vol. III – Supplement (Collections #3A.1 – God,
Yeshua, & Names)>]

For the readers of NT, it is not a later Christian canonical meaning (with its eisegesis of the OT), but
its meaning as in ‘Messiah the one who is to come’ in the Gospels [Yeshua of Nazareth as the Messiah]
and in the pre-Christian Palestinian Judaism of the ‘Second Temple Judaism’.]

• The Christian Christ (of Greco-Roman Christianity) is not same as the ‘Mashiah’ of the
New Testament.
• The Christian Christ is not same as the rabbinic Jewish Messiah.
• The rabbinic Jewish Messiah is not same as the Mashiah of the NT.
• The Mashiah of the NT is the one who was believed asb (not ‘proved to be’) the promised
Mashiah of TaNaKh (Old Testament) in the original setting of the first century CE of the
Apostolic Yeshua Movement within the Second Temple Judaism.

The terms being superimposed on the concept of ‘Messiah’ – ‘Son of Man’ (< son-of-man); ‘Son of
God’ (< ‘son of Elohim’ ‘God’s son’) ;‘[Suffering] Servant of the Lord’ ‘King of the final age’.

a
'keep it not open public that he is the expected Mashiah' ← that is, until the due time comes.
b
“believed as the very Mashiah” – not ‘proved to be the very Mashiah. [Cf. NT midrash of OT texts is not
for ‘proof’ of the prophecies, just as Christian midrash of NT as well as OT text is not for proof. They are
only to server as analogy to reveal the truths.]
195
Vocabulary:

Christ; the Anointed one [of Elohim]; Messiah (Mashiah) [of Elohim]; a messiah; messiahs;
antichrists.
Messianic; Messianics; Messianism; “Messianic prophecies”; “Messianic belief”; “Messianic
expectations”, vs. “eschatological expectations”; “messianic movements”; “Messianic secret” (in
G-Mark).

‘Christ problem’: (1) A Hellenic image completely divorced from the original word of Hebrew image
‘Mashiah’; (2) A westernized Christ image from Constantine Roman Christianism; (3) became a common
word, with the original meaning and usage unrecognized; even used as an expletive (same for ‘Jeesus’); (4)
contaminated with the so-called Cosmic Christ of new age movement; and (5) contaminated with the image
of Krishna, a Hindu deity (second person of Hindu trinity) (linguistically unrelated but of similarity in the
religious story; insisting Christ was Krishna);

Rx:
1. Messianic expectations in the 1st century Judaism
2. Yeshua and Messianic Expectation
3. Mashiah in OT – a Davidic royal Mashiah;
4. vs. Mashiah in NT (in reference to Yeshua) – the figure for the Kingdom reign of Elohim in Yeshua,
Master of Life eternal, Master over Life, The Divine Mashiah, the risen Lord exalted to the right of
Elohim, cannot be ‘God’, a deity, ‘Godman’ or ‘God the Son’.

On the word ‘Mashiah, Messiah’ from OT perspective and on Messiah vs. Christ, see EE here.19

Related topics: Messiah in Judaism and Judaic history. Messiah in OT and in the inter-testamental
period.

196
Yeshua – the person
He was born to be a God's human son. Nowhere in the Bible He was regarded and
classified as 'God the Son'. He was never called 'God' and was never claimed to be
'God'.a Those followed Him believed Him to be the promised Mashiah – as the son
of Elohim. He has been made 'God the Son', i.e. 'God Jesus' of the Trinitarians to be
worshiped as Elohim the Father is worshiped – worshiping more than one God-
being, here discounted is 'the Holy Ghost'.

Nowhere in the Bible He himself claimed to be 'God', that he was to be worshiped

because he was 'God'. Nowhere in the Bible there is as confusion of YHWH Elohim
and Yeshua b
Nowhere the Bible says 'God's being' is shared by three persons [or three Persons].
Nowhere the person of Yeshua was mentioned and alluded to in the OT.

Yeshua of the Scripture is not same as 'Jesus' c of the church of the religions in
Christianity ['Jesus' is their name of God → 'God Jesus']. It is in and by the Scripture
Yeshua, not Jesus, is to be revealed As to Who He is and what He is, not by man's
philosophy and theology.

He is as 'the Word of Elohim'. He is Incarnate Word (Logos) [Jn 1:14]. –

embodiment of the Word of Elohim. Not 'God Incarnate', not' 'Incarnate God [the
Son]', nor 'Incarnate Son of God'. The 'bread of the life' [Jn 6:35, 48], 'the life-giving
bread' [Jn 6:51] is 'the bread from the heaven' [Jn 6:31, 32, 41], 'the bread of Elohim'
[Jn 6:33], which is His 'flesh' [Jn 6:51] to be partaken [Jn 6:53-55].

That He carries titles which were used for Elohim does not mean he is 'God', nor he
is same as Elohim, YHWH.

[Yeshua of Nazareth; Mashiah of Elohim; ‘son of Elohim’ (this fixed phrase is not
capitalized in IRENT in order to remove a connotation of ‘God the Son’ (not a son as of a
human being); * Lamb of Elohim; the Word of Elohim; ‘Savior’ ‘Redeemer’; ‘Master’ /
‘Lord’]

He was a man – the *son-of-man, a mediator of God and man; not God, not God-man or
demigod. He was made 'God' in Greco-Roman Church.
He was a human being; a perfect human person (not 'fully man'), not God ('fully God') – he
has made ‘God’ as Christianity being developed in the form of Constantine Catholic Church.
There is no such notion of ‘pre-human Jesus’. He had human will, not divine will. He was
believed as the only-begotten son of Elohim. He was anointed in holy spirit to become the
beloved son → embodiment (Jn 1:14) of the Word of Elohim (Jn 1:1) [not 'the Spirit’s
anointing of Jesus’ humanity'] → taking to do the divine will of Father; not as if he has his
own divine will in addition to human will.
a Nowhere the Bible supports that the name of God is 'Jesus' [as the Trinitarians say]. [See elsewhere 'God problem'.]
b Nowhere the Bible says Jesus Christ is Jehovah - as the God-confused foolishly claim. Christian Research Journal, Vol.
20, No. 2, 1997. www.equip.org/article/effectively-sharing-the-deity-of-christ-with-jehovahs-witnesses/
c www.jewishvoice.org/learn/10-biggest-lies-about-yeshua-his-jewishness-and-what-some-call-jewish-christianity

197
 'Jesus' became (made) God, God Jesus, out of Trinitarian reading, interpretation and translation of Jn
1:1 and other NT texts.
http://web.ccbce.com/multimedia/BLB/Comm/jon_courson/Jhn/Jhn001top_v1.html
(Jon Courson) [- what does it mean by 'God'? what God? Which God? Whose God? – ARJ]
'Jesus is eternally God' – 'In the beginning was the word'
'Jesus is equally God' – ' and the Word was with God'
'Jesus is essentially God' – ' … and the Word was God'
Christ – exclusivity, authority, 'deity' [in the sense of 'Jesus is God' – ARJ]

Note: The Logos of Jn 1:1 is the Word of Elohim. It is not a person, not God the Son, nor
pre-existing eternal Jesus before being born of a virgin without a human father, nor a
Cosmic Christ, etc., etc.

The son-of-man

‘son of man’ - www.biblestudytools.com/bible-study/topical-studies/the-son-of-man-why-jesus-

favorite-name-for-himself-has-deep-meaning-for-us.html

In OT – Heb: ben adam

Ezekiel – God calls the prophet son of man 93x – being referred as a human being.
Psa 80:17 – “[O God] … Let Your hand be on the man at Your right hand, the son of man
you have made strong for yourself!
Dan 7:13 – one like a son of man, …
Psa 8:4 - What is man that You take thought of him, And a son of man that You care for him?
(quoted in Heb 2:6).

In NT (over 80x) –

Gk. ho huios tou anthrōpou (arthrous ‘the son of the man’) – i.e. a true human being; not
‘God the Son’, demigod or God-man.
In Gospels, mostly used by Yeshua referring to himself E.g. Mt 8:20; Mk 10:45; Lk 5:24; Jn
6:27, etc. (IRENT renders as ‘the son-of-man’ – hyphenated; uncapitalized). [Cf. in one
place in Acts 7:56 where it is used not in the lips of Yeshua himself but of Stephen in
reference to the risen Lord.] [In several places it is not self-designation – Jn 3:13, 14; 12:34
– here, rendered as ‘son-of-man’

Cf. ‘a son of man’ (anarthrous) in Rev 1:13; 14:14 and the OT quote in Heb 2:6].

198
 Who is Yeshua (to us)? ‘Jesus’? Whose Jesus? What Jesus – ‘pre-human’ or
‘resurrected’? or ‘God Jesus’?
Who was Yeshua to the people?
Who is He to be?

Note: We read 'Jesus is a divine person but not a human person' in Catholic teaching. Then
they cannot deny that it makes him a demigod or god-man. /Jesus/ of Christian religion and
church is a theological construct, not the very person lived in the history as presented in NT.
This is not a theological but simply a linguistic and literary argument for common sense and
logic.

[Vocab: veneration, adoration, devotion, worship, to revere; cultic, religious – meaning,

senses of the words]

'Jesus, God the Son' vs. 'Yeshua, the son of Elohim''

'Jesus devotion'; 'Jesus worship': -

[See '* God problem' elsewhere]

Note: in common English usage, worship can be for any object – God, man, thing, or idea,
etc. That someone is worshiped or is to be worship does not mean that the object people
worship is 'God', whatever the word 'worship' is meant and whatever the word /God/ means.
We have a linguistic problem here to deal with, before getting into lofty theological or
doctrinal issues. [E.g. '/God/ is dead' – which God, whose God, or what God itself is meant.]
https://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/essays-etc/ [list of writings with web link]
https://larryhurtado.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/jesus-as-lordly-example.pdf
[ … in contrast with the 'historical Jesus' focus …]
['the origins and meaning of the idea of Jesus' filial relationship and statues with God]
Hurtado (2015, 3rd ed.), One God, One Lord: Early Christian Devotion and Ancient
Jewish Monotheism
‘Jesus of Religion’, 'Jesus religion' vs. 'Christianity vs. Christianisms (after the Pauline
mission to the Gentile) – Judaic → Hellenistic → Roman Christianity → degenerated
religiosity –– charismatic-shamanic – 'worshiptainment' (with instrumental music and
'sermontainment') – gospel of human-potential, purpose-driven, prosperity-peddling.
[different from 'Yeshua of the Gospels']
Constantine Roman Christianism: ‘God Jesus’, ‘God the Son’, ‘Eternal preexisting Son’, ‘God’’
‘God of God’ ‘Fully God’ ‘Truly God’, Cosmic Christ’, etc. as ‘Jesus’ – a man who became ‘God’
from 2nd century on.
[Cf. Docetism (vs. Gnosticism); demi-god, God-man, the Second ‘person’ of ‘Trinity God’,
‘human being but not human person, but divine person’.]

If Jesus is God, but he is not a God? Why not 'worship'? 'Pray to Jesus'? But, also, why not worship
the Holy Spirit; not pray to the Holy Spirit, if it is actually God and a Person?

The following often quoted actually show the examples which are not prayer to Jesus: [Yeshua, his
disciples, apostles do not tell we pray Jesus (as well as Holy Ghost) – as Trinitarians are forced, since
they believe 'Jesus is God', the name of their God is 'Jesus'. Whatever happened to God the Father,
YHWH Elohim when they pray to Jesus??

• Stephen: "Lord Yeshua, receive my spirit … Lord, do not charge this sin against them." (Act
7:59) [talking to Yeshua in his vision; not in prayer.]
199
 • '… are calling upon the name of our Lord, Yeshua Mashiah (1Co 1:2)
[Calling upon his exalted name (Phi 2:9) is not to be praying to 'Jesus'.
• 'I pleaded with the Lord Mashiah that the thorn to my flesh might depart from me' (2Co 12:9)
• 'May our Lord Yeshua Mashiah himself and Elohim our Father … comfort your hearts (2Th
2:16)
• "Even so come, Lord Yeshua! (Rev 22:20)
• "Maranatha" (Come, O Lord) (1Co 16:22)
• 'worship' the Lamb (Rev 5:13-14) – does not mean the Lamb is 'God' being worshiped.
• Heb 7:25 "… as he intercedes in behalf of them". – as the High Priest he intercedes our prayer
to God the Father. [Mt 6:9]

Theoretically, if any person or thing is as your god, it would be an object of 'worship' (whatever it
means) and 'prayers' (whatever it means) would be offered to it.

The Gospel presents him as the Incarnate Word (Word became as flesh, i.e. embodiment of the
Word of Elohim Jn 1:14) A man (1Tim 2:5). Not 'God Incarnate', not demi-god or god-man
who was supposed to be born of a virgin in virginal conception without a human father. /x:
‘God in the flesh’; /x: ‘God the Son’. He is believed as God but he is not ‘the God’ (YHWH
Elohim). Thematically related = Immanuel (Mt 1:24 ‘Elohim is with us’ – YHWH presence
with us in the person of Yeshua. It is not a proper name as such. Yeshua for himself was
nowhere called as such. Yeshua was not 'Immanuel' but he came to us 'as Immanuel' – a typical
Matthean pesher. To Thinking it is one of his title is a typical Christian pesher. To take Isa 9:6
as a messianic prophecy with the array of titles put onto 'Jesus' is a Christian messianic pesher;
not a word is quoted in NT.

200
*Concordance: The name Yeshua + Title

‘Lord Yeshua'
"Lord Yeshua" (Rm 14:14; 1Co 11:23; 2Co 4:14; 11:31; Eph 1:15; Col 3:17; 1Th 3:12;
4:1, 2; 2Th 1:7; 2:8 v.l).
"our Lord Yeshua" (2Co 1:14; Heb 13:20; 1Th 3:11, 13; 2Th 1:8; 1Th 5:9 v.l.)

‘Lord Yeshua Mashiah' about 60x in Acts (incl. 9:34 v.l.) and Epistles
"our Lord Yeshua Mashiah" (1Co 1:2; 1Th 2:19; 5:23, 28; 2Th 1:12 v.l.; 2:1, 14, 16;
3:6; 1Pe 1:3)
the Lord Yeshua Mashiah – Rm 13:14; 1Co 6:11 v.l. (our ~); 16:23; 2Co 13:14; Eph
6:23; Phi 1:2; 4:23; 1Th 1:1; 2Th 1:1, 2, 12;
Lord Yeshua Mashiah –1Co 1:3; 2Co 1:2; Eph 1:2; Phi 3:20; Col 1:2; 1Th 1:1; 2Th 1:1;
2Th 1:12; 3:12; Phm 3; Jam 1:1; Jud 5;
our Lord Yeshua Mashiah (the Lord of us Yeshua the Mashiah) Rm 1:8; 5:2, 11; 15:6,
30; 16:27; 1Co 1:2, 7, 8, 10; 15:57; 2Co 1:3; 8:9; Gal 6:14, 18; Eph 1:3, 17; 3:14; 5:20;
6:24; Col 1:3; 1Th 1:3; 5:24, 28; 2Th 1:12 v.l.; 2:1, 14, 16; 3:6, 12 v.l., 18; 1Tim 6:3,
14; Phm 25; Jam 2:1; 1Pe 1:3; 2Pe 1:8, 14, 16; Jud 21;

201
*Concordance: 'Yeshua as Mashiah' 'Yeshua the Mashiah' vs. 'Mashiah Yeshua'

4G Act General Pauline Rev Total

Lord Yeshua Mashiah 0 0 8x 49x 1x 58x
Yeshua as Mashiah. 5x - - - -
82x
Yeshua the Mashiah - 11x 29 33x 4x
Mashiah Yeshua 0 1x 0 89x 0 90x
Cf. Lord Yeshua 0 0 2 22x 0 24x

Romans: tally may differ because of mss variants. [cf. mss variant in Rm 1:1 'Mashiah Yeshua'
vs. 'Yeshua Mashiah'
IRENT NWT 1984 NWT 2013
'Jesus' + 'Christ'
Lord Yeshua Mashiah 2x 5 6
Lord Yeshua. 2x 2 (14:14; 16:20) 2
Yeshua the Mashiah. 17 17 16
Mashiah Yeshua 14 14 15
total 31 30 31

‘Jesus Christ’ is the traditional English translation of Gk. Iēsous Christos. The biblical sense is
‘Yeshua as Mashiah’ or Yeshua the Mashiah'. However, the sense in common English usage is
quite different, having brought unbiblical alien pictures to the word. It is now a person whom
the Trinitarian believes to be God [as ‘God the Son’] and worship accordingly, whose varied
portraits have shown up in paintings and icons. The word ‘Christ’ fails to carry the biblical
sense of Mashiah (or Messiah), but a title for identification but without biblical significance of
‘the anointed one by YHWH Elohim for a king, a priest, and a prophet. We can say that someone
'believes Jesus Christ' means, among other things, is to believe Him as God?

202
 [Compare with an example:
(The word ‘President’ is capitalized as the particularized one for the president of USA)
Ref. on Greek polydefinites:
• http://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/000796/v1.pdf
• http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.636.4783&rep=rep1&type=pdf =
https://web.archive.org/web/20150923053015/www.ucl.ac.uk/pals/research/linguistics/publicati
ons/wpl/07papers/uclwpl_19_LekakouSzendroi

(examples of ‘close appositives’) Determiner spreading determiner phrase

• President Lincoln – focus in ‘Lincoln’ with ‘President’ as a descriptive title, similar
to Mr. Lincoln, Commander in Chief Lincoln, Prof. (professor), Hon. (honorable
judge), etc.
• Lincoln the President’ – Outside of his time the phrase is in the sense of ‘Lincoln who
was the President. Cf. Lincoln presidency.
• ‘Lincoln President’ – the focus is ‘President’, the position of which was then what
Lincoln is. (= 'Lincoln as President'; not 'Lincoln = President').
• ‘Lincoln as President’ – ‘as President’ is a descriptive phrase for his role and position
of the president.
• ‘Lincoln, a President’?? – the word President is a qualifier, descriptive word.

Maestro Toscanini President Lincoln

Toscanini the Maestro
Toscanini as Maestro
/x: Toscanini Maestro??
→ Toscanini-type Maestro?
or, Toscanini as Maestro?
Lincoln the President’
Lincoln as President’
/x: Lincoln President??
→ Lincoln-style President?
or, Lincoln as President?

Such a word order change does not materially change its sense or usage.

• He is King George
• He is the King George
• He is George King? → George as King? George the King?
• He is George the King.
In English diction the phrase ‘Jesus Christ’ → 'Jesus-type Christ' or 'Jesus who is Christ'

For the Trinitarian ‘God Jesus’

the difference between Jesus Christ and Christ Jesus is subtle and, in most
contexts, insignificant. Placing the human name first puts a slight emphasis on the
Lord’s humanity; placing the divine title first puts a slight emphasis on the Lord’s
deity. Either way, Jesus is the Christ, the Messiah, the Chosen One of God.

www.gotquestions.org/Jesus-Christ-Christ-Jesus.html

203
 Conclusion: Christos Iēsous vs. Iēsous Christos (both anarthrous)a

‘Jesus Christ’ – vs. ‘Jesus the Christ’ [no Gk. phrase], vs. ‘Jesus, Christ’ vs. 'Christ Jesus'
In the GNT, often we have Yeshua (Iēsous) and Mashiah (Christos), the two being combined into a
single phrase (Iēsous Christos or Christos Iēsous).

Ref. www.patheos.com/blogs/jesuscreed/2013/11/26/not-christ-but-messiah-nt-wright-on-
translating-christos/

[Cf. non-sensical writing - http://removethemud.com/wp/studies/jesus-christ-vs-christ-jesus/ ]

In the Epistles, as 'Lord Yeshua Mashiah' (1Co 1:3; 1Th 1:1, etc.), 'our Lord, Yeshua Mashiah' (1Co 1:2; Eph
1:3; 1Pe 1:3, etc.) with his Lordship which is not to be confused with 'divinity'. Here, the word 'Lord' is in
reference to the risen and exalted Yeshua, whereas in the Gospels the same Gk. kurios is rendered as 'Master',
a title as used by his disciples, followers, and people in reference of Yeshua during his ministry.

Mashiah, the Master (/Messiah the Lord – HCSB, NIV; /x: Christ the Lord – KJV, ESV, NASB) – Lk 2:11

Yeshua + Mashiah
'Yeshua Mashiah' ('Jesus Christ'): Yeshua known/believed as the promised Mashiah (God’s anointed
one as for a Davidic king)
‘Mashiah Yeshua’ (‘Christ Jesus’): Yeshua particularized with the title Mashiah.

Iēsous Christos = Yeshua who is believed as Mashiah (a Messianic figure). This is similar
to the phrase ‘God + Father', where ‘God the Father’ should be understood as ‘Elohim as
Father’ (e.g. Eph 6:23).
'Yeshua as Mashiah' to be a Mashiah coming for Israel;
'Yeshua the Mashiah' to be the Mashiah who has come as the Savior.

Christos Iēsous = Yeshua who is Mashiah (God's anointed)

Yeshua as Mashiah (Iēsous Christos) – 그리스도(로 오실) 예수

Yeshua the Mashiah (Iēsous Christos) – 그리스도(로 오신) 예수
Mashiah Yeshua (Christos Iēsous) – 그리스도(이신) 예수 – all in Pauline (cf. 1Pe
5:10 v.l.)

a
http://removethemud.com/wp/studies/jesus-christ-vs-christ-jesus/ (note: trinitarian hocus-pocus, e.g. ‘Jesus Christ’ <
‘Christ Jesus’ = ‘God’, ‘the Almighty God’)
204
(A) Iēsous Christos:
Iēsous Christos [anarthrous]
'Yeshua as Mashiah’ 'Yeshua the Mashiah' > ‘Jesus Christ’
Cf. in the oldest complete mss of GNT, Codex Sinaiticus, has it in nomina sacra ( ).];

‘Mashiaḥ’(>> ‘Christ) = an anointed one (by God) – a title; not a ‘messianic title’; not a ‘heavenly
title’.

In the NT the phrase (alone with the word ‘Lord’) occurs first time in Mt 1:1 and in all the books
of NT, except Luke, 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians, Philemon and 3 John. The last time it
appears is in Rev 1:5 (or 1:9 v.l.)

Yeshua as Mashiah (> Jesus Christ) – in Gospels 5x – Mt 1:1, 18; Mk_1:1; Jn 1:17; 17:3;
none in Lk;
Yeshua the Mashiah (> Jesus Christ) – outside Gospels about 70x [e.g. Act 2:38; 3:6; 4:10;
8:12; 9:34; 10:36, 48; 16:18.] 2x in Rev 1:1, 2, 5, 9 v.l.
Jn 9:22 "confess him [Yeshua] as Mashiah"
Act 8:37 v.l. "the very Yeshua the Mashiah"
Mt 27:17, 22"Yeshua the one who is called Mashiah"
Jn 20:31 "… yoů all may believe that Yeshua is the Mashiah, the * son of Elohim, …"
His followers had come to believe He was the anointed one by God, the promised one to come.
Yeshua Himself did not go on His mission claiming that He Himself was the Mashiah'.

With a definite article for Iēsou

tou Iēsou Christou Mt 1:18; ‘the very Yeshua as Mashiah’
ton Iēsoun Christon Act 8:37 v.l. ‘the very Yeshua the Mashiah’
[anarthrous] except in Act 9:34 v.l. Yeshua {the} Mashiah (>Jesus the Christ)

It is translated as 'Jesus Christ' as translated in most English Bibles is now a church lingo with
‘Jesus’ = ‘Christ’.
Along with its connotation (of 'Jesus God'), it is different and alienated from the biblical 'Yeshua
the Mashiah'. It fails to carry the biblical true sense but a re-creates an image of Him as Christ of
Church or of Christendom with its tradition (e.g. various portraits in paintings and icons).

'Jesus who is called Christ' (KJV, NASB, ESV, NET) is now nonsensical, as the word 'Christ' in English
is used synonymous of 'Jesus'. Compare with 'Jesus who is called Messiah' (NIV, HCSB) for the Greek
'Iēsoun ton legomenon Christon' (Mt 27:17).

It now carries a problem of cultural and religious anachronism – a (linguistic) construct in the
tradition of Christendom. The Scripture tells of Yeshua and the Mashiah; not of ‘Jesus Christ’. 20
The English phrase is disconnected historically, culturally, linguistically, theologically and
spiritually from the real person ‘Yeshua the Mashiah’ – with Hebraic root of Christianity being
ignored and suppressed. 21 ‘I believe in Yeshua the Mashiah’a is far different from ‘I believe in
Jesus Christ’ – each belonging in the different culture and mindset as well as religious historical
background.

a
‘The one who believes in Yeshua does not believe in him, but [actually] in the One who has sent
him’ – Jn 12:44 (Cf. Jn 14:1).
205
 Note: When his proper and correct name and title of ‘Yeshua’ and ‘Mashiah’, in place of ‘Jesus’ and
‘Christ’, it is all but impossible to be used as a common English expletive in with ‘Jesus Christ’. a

[Cf. www.greekingout.com/2011/06/nt-wright-on-translating-christ/ 22] (‘Hebraic’ > ‘Jewish’)

[Ref. www.westarinstitute.org/resources/the-fourth-r/how-did-jesus-become-god/ How and Why.
(When)
[Cf. Peter DeRosa (1974), Jesus Who Became Christ – bio of Jesus in Trinitarian eyes.]

‘Jesus Christ’ – ‘Christian Christ’ (= Christians’ Christ) vs. ‘Biblical NT Mashiah’ (not ‘Jewish Messiah’ or
‘rabbinic Jewish Messiah’).

Hence the Gk. phrase Iesous Christos (‘Jesus Christ’) is used in the sense of ‘Yeshua as Mashiah’. The Gk.
phrase (Iesous ho Christos ‘Jesus the Christ’) as such does not appear in NT. The phrase ‘the Mashiah’ (/x:
the Christ) is not what it stands for Yeshua himself (as if his last term or the sole title for him) but the role to
which Yeshua is ascribed. (Mk 8:29). ['Jesus' → 'Jesus Christ' → 'Christ Jesus' → 'Christ' → Cosmic Christ']

That he 'is Lord' does not connote that his identity is 'Lord', but rather means that he is as Lord. This applies
all the statements with the copula 'is'. E.g. 'He is King' means He is as King. The son of King (prince) is king
to the subject; not his identity is 'king', but he is as king. 'YWHW is our Elohim' means He is as Elohim.
Jesus was made and became God, the statement 'Jesus is God' itself means 'Jesus is as God'. However, there
is no statement 'Jesus is God' anywhere in the Bible. With pick-and-choose proof-texting for the Trinity
doctrine, they have their people goofed to believe their Jesus is now 'God'. They know well he was not a
God in his life, but believe there was a preexisting Jesus (Comic Christ, God the Son), and there is God
Jesus in heaven.

a
This is same in case of using ‘Elohim’ instead of ‘God’ in IRENT (for the arthrous Gk. noun). It is
impossible to use ‘Elohim’ as an expletive. Similarly, ‘하느님’ in Korean is not possible to be used
as expletive.
206
(B) Christos Iēsous
Christos Iēsous ‘Mashiah Yeshua’ >> 'Christ Jesus'
Christos Iēsous – (anarthrous); occurs less frequently. Yeshua particularized with the title Mashiah.
Mashiah Yeshua (/x: Christ Jesus) – 82x.It is a Pauline unique expression (not in Heb.) all in Pauline Letters,
except 4x (Act 3:20; 5:42 v.l.; 24:24 v.l. ('faith in ~~').; 1Pe 5:10 v.l. (His eternal glory in ~~).). [Cf. 1Pe 5:14
Christ {Jesus} KJV] Cf. "Yeshua is the very Mashiah" – Act 5:42
It does not appear in all Gospels, 2 Thessalonians, Hebrews, James, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John,
Jude and Revelation. Sometimes, the two phrases occur in the same paragraph (e.g. Phi 2:5 & 11)

http://concordiakoinonia.com/2011/10/16/christ-jesusjesus-christ/

[Examples where it was applied to Paul's own designation: 'apostle of ~~'. 1Co 1:1; 2Co 1:1; Eph 1:1; Col
1:11; 2Ti 1:1; 'prisoner of ~~'. Phi 1:1; 'servant of ~~'. Rm 1:1; 'servants of ~~'. Phi 1:1]

• Christos Iēsous – Rm 8:34 v.l.; 2Co 1:1 v.l., 19; Col 1:1 v.l.; 1Ti 1:15, 16 v.l.; 2:5; 5:21 v.l.; 2Ti
1:1;
• Christou Iēsou Rm 2:16 v.l.; 15:16 v.l.; Gal 2:16; Eph 1:1 v.l.; 3:1; Phi 1:1 v.l., 1:6 v.l., 8 v.l.;
3:8; Col 4:12 v.l.; 1Ti 1:1 v.l., 2 v.l.; 6:13; 2Ti 1:2; Phm 1:1;
• Christō Iēsou 1Ti 1:2; 4:6 v.l.; 2Ti 1:10 v.l.; 2:3 v.l.; 4:1 v.l.; Tit 1:4 v.l.; 2:3 v.l.; Phm 1:9 v.l.
en Christō Iēsou Rm 3:24; 6:11, 23; 8:1, 2, 11 v.l.; 39; 15:17; 16:3; 1Co 1:2, 4, 30; 4:15, 17 v.l.;
15:31; 16:24; Gal 2:4; 3:14, 26, 28; 5:6; 6:15 v.l.; Eph 2:6, 7, 10, 13, 20 v.l.; 3:6 v.l., 11, 21;
Phi 1:26; 2:5; 3:3, 14; 4:7, 19, 21; Col 1:4, 28 v.l.; 1Th 2:14; 5:18; 1Ti 1:14; 3:13; 2Ti 1:9, 13;
2:1, 10; 3:12, 15; Phm 1:23; 1Pe 5:10, v.l. (1Pe 5:14 v.l.).;
• Christon Iēsoun Rm 15:8 v.l.; 2Co 4:5; Gal 4:14
eis Christon Iēsoun Rm 6:3; Gal 2:16; Phm 1:6 v.l.; Act 24:24 v.l.;
kata Christon Iēsoun Rm 15:5
• When it is with the article ho Christos Iēsous, it is rendered as ‘the very Mashiah Yeshua’, taking
the article functioning for specification:
tou Christou Iēsou Phi 2:21 v.l.; 3:12
tou Christou [Iēsou] Gal 5:24 v.l.; Eph 3:1 v.l.;
ton Christon Iēsoun Col 2:6; Act 5:42 v.l.

207
Appellative (epithets, titles and descriptives) of Yeshua
• 1Ti 2:5 'one mediatora between God and humanity, a man Mashiah Yeshua' (not just 'Yeshua
as a man'). [a man, that is, not demigod or God-man, virgin-born]
Heb 9:15; 12:24 – 'Yeshua, the mediator of a new covenant'
• 'Word incarnate' (Jn 1:14): (the Word of Elohim embodied in the person of Yeshua); not
'God Incarnate', or 'Incarnate God'; nor 'Jehovah' Incarnate. Not 'God who was crucified' or
'God the Son' who became human 'flesh' – what of 'flesh'? Note: ‘Logos’ (in English) ss a
technical term – religious and philosophical church jargon.
• as 'the Word of Elohim' (Rev 19:13); as 'the Word of the Life' (1Jn 1:1)
• his flesh as the bread from the heaven (Jn 6:33, 38; 41)
• as Immanuel to us. (Mt 1:23)
• the Lamb of Elohim (Jn 1:29, 36). [A title incompatible with God or God the Son.]
• Mashiah, our Passover sacrifice (1Co 5:7)
• To be sin-offering on our behalf (2Co 5:21) (Col 4:3)
• 'the son of Elohim'; Himself called ‘the son-of-man’ (i.e. a man, human being)
• '[the Mashiah shall be] a Lord of both the dead and the living (Rm 14:9)
• One Lord, Yeshua Mashiah vs. one God (Elohim), the Father (1Co 8:8) – not 'God the Son'.
• The Mashiah, the promised to come. Not an eternal pre-existing 'Christ', or 'Cosmic Christ' –
'Christ' in church lingo is farther away from the notion of the Anointed one by Elohim in the
Scriptures.
• God's *Anointed one – Mt 16:16; 23:10; 26:68; Mk 8:29; Lk 4:18; 9:20; Jn 1:41; 4:25;
Act 3:19; 4:26, 27; 10:38; Heb 1:8; – by Elohim to be king, prophet, and kohen);
• a High Kohen (> 'High Priest') (Heb 2:16; 3:1; 4:14; 8:1)
• Chosen as God's Predestined Son – 'the only-begotten Son' of Elohim. (Jn 1:14,
18; 3:16, 18; 1Jn 4:19;
• *Deliverer/ *Savior – (S4990 sōtēr) bringer of God's Salvation (Lk 2:11); [Cf. Isa 45:21
moshiah!! > H3467 yasha. Cf. Psa 18:2 ū·mə·p̄ al·ṭî > (H6403 palat 'deliver')]
• 'King of Kings' (1Tim 6:15; Rev 17:14; 19:16); the King of the kingdom reign of
Elohim.
• the son of Elohim; /xx: God the Son; He did not claim to be 'God'. He was not called 'God'.
• Prophet [ God's Messenger]
• 'The God's Messenger' 'the Apostle' - the one who is sent (messenger, apostle) Heb 3:1
• the mystery of Elohim, that is, Mashiah (Col 2:2) [Cf. "the mystery of the Mashiah" Eph
3:4; Col 4:3]
• The Way (to Father) (Jn 14:6); The Way for YHWH (Mk 1:3 //Mt 3:3 //Lk 3:4)
• Light – God's Light; Light to the world
• Yeshua: Son of David (Mt 1:1); from David’s seed (Rm 1:3; Jn 7:46; 2Tim 2:8; cf. 2Sam 7:12-16).
The offspring of David (Rev 22:16); the root of David (Rev 5:5); out of the David’s loin (Act 2:30);
[He was one of Yehudim (> 'Jews')]
• Creator' of the new creation [Col 1:16] [Cf. 2Co 5:17; Eph 2:10] [Cf. the God's
Word [ho logos (Jn 1:1a-b; 1:1c-2) in Genesis Creation (Jn 1:2-3)].
• Healer, not magician. Wonder worker with mighty work of God, pointing to God's
presence in the people, not a 'miracle' performer.
• 'our Passover sacrifice' (1Co 5:7)
• 'the wisdom of Elohim' (1Co 1:24, 30)
• *Rock - ‘the Rock’ – Mt 16:18b; 1Co 10:4; 1Pe 2:8;

a
'*mediator' ░░ S3316 mesitēs (6x) Gal 3:19, 20; 1Tm 2:5; Heb 8:6; 9:15; 12:24. [Comparable to Heb. word /Shaliah
(not in OT) from H7971 shalach 'to send' Gen 3:23; H7972 selach Ezr 4:11). Cf. /Shaliach Yeshua ]
b
Cf. Mt 16:18b this rock ░░ [S4073 petra (15x) rock-mass] [Here, the word 'this' pointing to Yeshua himself (cf.
'destroy this temple Mk 14:58'), not to Peter, the alleged first pope of Catholic Church. 'You are Kefa'; Yeshua did not
say 'you are the rock', but 'I'll give you the keys'] [Coming into their view on the way to Caesarea Philippi with its
famous massive rock cliff in; below it there existed a temple for Greek god Pan and another one for Caesar.]
208
 [Cf. 1Co 3:11 "no one can lay down another foundation other than what is already laid, which
is Yeshua {the} Mashiah himself."]
[cf. YHWH as the Rock (H6697 tsur) - Deu 32:4; 1Sam 2:2; Psa 18:2; 28:1. YHWH as the
rock-cliff Psa 18:2 (H5553 sela)]
• the cornerstone (S204 akrogōniaios 1Pe 2:6; Eph 2:20). Cf. Mt 7:24 (bedrock, foundation
rock); Rm 9:33. Cf. Isa 28:16 LXX];
www.angelfire.com/space/thegospeltruth/trinity.html

• *firstborn – prōtotokos [S4416 (8x)]

Col 1:15 (firstborn over all creation) [Cf. Exo 4:22, Jer 31:9] [cf. 'firstborn of all
creation] /firstborn of – KJV, NASB; /firstborn over – NIV; /pre-eminent over –
New Heart English Bible;
≈ Eph 1:4 (‘before founding of the world’; not Genesis Creation);
Rm 8:29 firstborn among many brethren;
Col 1:18; Rev 1:5; the firstborn from out of the dead;
Heb 1:6 the firstborn into the inhabited world.
Heb 12:23 the Mashiah community of the firstborn,
Lk 2:7; the firstborn son

[cf. sense of 'pre-eminence' 'the first of ~' is not in the sense of 'being first created'. Cf.
NWT Col 1:16, 17, 20 – 'all other things' instead of 'all things']

Cf. 'firstborn' - In OT – Psa 89:27 (for David); 1Sa 17:13 (Eliab); Jer 31:9 (Ephraim,
younger than Manasseh, called firstborn, in Gen 41:51). Heb 11:28;
Cf. 'begotten' [as to Yeshua] (< brought forth – IRENT) [gegennēka > gennaō (S1080)]
– Act 13:13; Heb 1:5; 5:5; [the word is not about being-created, but intimate relation
btw father and son. Cf. 'you are my son' [Mt 17:5 //Mk 9:7 //Lk 9:35]
Cf. monogenēs S3439 'only-begotten' [as to Yeshua] – Jn 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1Jn 4:9;
[As to others – Heb 11:17 (Isaac); 1Jn 3:9; 5:1, 18; 1Pe 1:3; 1Co 4:15; Phi 1:10]; [Note:
'begotten' – archaic word]

• Gal 4:4 'having been born of a woman' ░░ genomenon ek gunaikos [S1096

ginomai] [against 'born of a virgin', 'born of Mary Ever-Virgin' (myth of
'virgin birth of Jesus' as a demigod or god-man)] [against Docetism - cf. Gal
4:29 ‘born according to flesh ~ to spirit’.] /born of a woman – most; /having
come into being out of a woman; />> came to be out of a woman – NWT3;
/xx: made of a woman – KJV; /xx: came as the son of a human mother – GNT
[cf. Mt 1:16 '… Yosef the husband of Mariam, of whom Yeshua was brought
forth' S1080 gennaō] [Cf. Mt 11:11 "(Yohanan the immerser ~~) among those
brought forth of women" en gennētois gunaikōn.]

• Not a Zealot (revolutionary for overthrowing Roman power)

• Not anti-Judaism to replace the Judaism (Yehudism) with a new religion of
'Christianity' of the Church.
• Not the founder of 'Christianity'; not a Christian.
• Not an Antinomian to abolish the Law (Torah).
• Was one of Torah-keeping Yehudim of the Second Temple Judaism.

209
Kurios – 'Lord' vs. Master
[See under the heading <* Lord> elsewhere.]
'Hooked on Lord' – whoever is addressed to as 'lord' in their language, they take it to mean he is a god.

See '*pretext' '*proof-text' '*context '*eisegesis in <Walk through the Scripture #1 - Words, Words and
Words>.

The arthrous Greek ho kurios, when it is applied to the risen and exalted Yeshua, it is rendered as ‘the
Lord’. This is outside the Gospels and includes Act 2:36; 5:14; 9:1b, along with the phrase 'Lord Yeshua' or
'Lord Yeshua Mashiah' – reflecting His Lordship.
"every mouth shall openly-confess that Yeshua Mashiah is ‘Lord’
— to the glory of Elohim the Father." [Phi 2:11]

Note: the anarthrous noun is usually in reference to YHWH Elohim (the God); it is rendered as Adonai or
YHWH.

The same Greek word for Yeshua in the Gospels is rendered as ‘Master’ throughout the Gospels in
IRENT, as the word 'lord' has become used in reference to a deity. This includes Lk 2:11 ("there is born
to yoů today a deliverer, who is Mashiah, the Master").

Vocative Kurie – 'O Lord' vs. 'O Master' or Sir!

When the word is used to address Yeshua – either as O Master! Sir! depending on the context.
E.g. 'Sir!' – Jn 4:11, 15, 19 (from the mouth of the Samaritan woman at the well). Lk 19:8 (Zacchaeus).
Noteworthy examples are:
Mt 7:21 ("Master! Master!", not "Lord! Lord!").
Jn 9:36 vs. 38 (from the mouth of a blind man healed) – both rendered as 'Sir!. Some render both as Lord
(KJV); most render both as Sir and Lord.

Outside the Gospels – Act 1:16 ("O Master!") vs. Act 9:6a v.l. (O Lord!),

‘Suffering Servant’ in Isa 52:13 – 53:12

Both ancient and modern rabbinic commentators ascribe the ‘*suffering servant’ [the expression which
does not appear in NT] in Isa 53 to the nation of Israel. [Ref. Tovia Singer (2014), Let’s Get Biblical –
Why Doesn’t Judaism Accept the Christian Messiah? p. 116. Christian pesher (midrashic exegesis) takes
it to refer to ‘Jesus Christ’.]

NT shows its own pesher exegesis of OT texts used as quotations and even allusions. It is
common esp. in the Gospels. What we have from such exegesis is actually unrelated to the
original meaning in the setting of OT text. (It is not so much of committing error (fabricating)
of taking out of context’.

This should not be confused with so-called ‘Christian pesher' of NT as well as OT text which
is more of theological and church doctrinal elaboration. It conflates 'the figure of the Suffering
Servant of YHWH' with the figure of the Passover Sacrifice. [See also in WB#2 <Text,
Translation, and Translations>]

The son of Elohim (> the Son of God; cf. God's Son) vs. God the Son.
210
 The expression 'the *son of Elohim' denotes the special unique relation of him to his heavenly Father.
He was born to be and became to be as the Son as in a Hebrew idiom ('son of'). He was vindicated as the
only-begotten son ho monogenēs huios [- KJV] of Elohim. [not monogenēs Theos 'only-begotten God]
– [Jn 1:18]. Not in the biological sense as Muslims misunderstand. It is a title synonymous of the Mashiah
of Elohim, the anointed as king, prophet, and kohen.

‘*Lamb of Elohim’ (‘Lamb of God’)

Jn 1:29, 36 the Lamb of Elohim ░░ [only 2x here in G-Jn]; /Lamb of God – most; [seh-haElohim
– Heb.] [Not in OT] [Note: The exact phrase 'Passover lamb' does not appear in the Bible']

Cf. ‘our Passover sacrifice (1Co 5:7; cf. Exo 12:5); ‘the Lamb that was slaughtered’ (Rev 13:8);
‘a lamb to the slaughter’ (Isa 53:7). ‘Yeshua is as the Lamb’; not ‘Yeshua is the Lamb’. Similarly,
‘Yeshua was as the sin sacrifice’; not ‘Yeshua was the sin sacrifice’ 2Co 5:21]

[Yeshua was born as a Passover lamb early Abib BC 3, died as the Passover lamb Abib 14, CE
30. See the file collection, <IRENT Vol. III - Supplement (Collections #6A - Passion Week
Chronology)>]

[amnos. Cf. Aramaic ‘talya’ – amnos (lamb) or pais (servant)] [Lev 16:6-10; 1Jn 2:2; 4:10] (cf.
Isa 53:6-7; Jn 1:36; Act 8:32-33; 1Pe 1:18-19; Rev 5:6, 8, 12, 13; 6:1). [Isa 53:7, 10 LXX He
suffered like a lamb that is led to slaughter’ and gave Himself as ‘an offering for sin’ cf. lamb as
burnt-offering by Abraham in Gen 22:8; cf. Passover lamb Jn 19:36; 1Co 5:7 – not sin offering;
cf. ‘lamb’ (arnion) in Rev 5:6ff as the title of Christ] [– FF Bruce p. 52] [cf. Act 8:32 ‘sheep led
to the slaughter’ ‘lamb before its shearer’] [Cf. zeroah of Seder meal – ‘shank bone’]
Marijke H. de Lang, “John 1:29, 36: The Meaning of ἀμνὸς τοῦ θεοῦ and John’s Soteriology” Journal
of Biblical Text Research 성경원문연구 (in Korean), 2015, No. 37, p. 236ff
3. Conclusions
First, the background of John 1:29 and 36 is probably best explained with the help of Isaiah 53:7, but
the emphasis is on obedience and submission, not on suffering and death.
Secondly, the image of “lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” does not have a
sacrificial meaning. It does not refer to Jesus’ death.
Thirdly, the origins of the early-Christian idea of the atoning effect of Jesus’ suffering and dying do
not lie in the Hebrew Old Testament but in the Hellenistic-Jewish concept of the martyr (which
in its turn derives from pagan Greek tradition).
Fourthly, Johannine soteriology is different from Pauline soteriology: the emphasis in John is not on
Jesus’ death as saving event, but on accepting Jesus as the only one through whom the Father
can be known.
And fifthly, for translation it should be seriously considered to render – if of course possible in the
target language – the singular ἁμαρτία with a singular in the target language, and to render
τίθεναι τὴν ψυχήν ὑπέρ with “to risk his life for”.

211
http://chosenpeople.com/main/article/behold_yeshua_the_passover_lamb_of_god.html
The Sacrificial Substitute in Genesis Gen 22:2; 7-8
The Passover Lamb Exodus 12:3, 6, 7; [Cf.

John 1:29 and John 19:36.

The Lamb in Pseudo-epigraphic Literature
"Do ye therefore, my children, observe the commandments of the LORD, and honor Levi and
Judah; for from them shall arise unto you the Lamb of God, who taketh away the sin of the world,
one who saves all the Gentiles and Israel" Testament of Joseph (2 Joseph 77)

the imagery of the victorious Lamb is found is the First Book of Enoch
the fifth chapter of the Book of Revelation (Rev 5:6,11-12)

The Passover Lamb and the Redemption of the World

The image of sacrificial suffering and triumphant victory is perhaps most fully realized in the words
of Revelation 13:8-"...the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world."

Now we see the redemption of God at work not only through the eyes of the children of Israel
delivered at the Exodus, not only through the eyes of those who witnessed the awesome power of
the resurrection at the empty tomb, but as though through the eyes of the Lord Himself at Creation.
We see redemption, if you will, as a foundational building block of reality.

The story of this sweeping vision is foretold in Scripture, demonstrated at Passover, and fulfilled
at the Cross and the Resurrection. For Yeshua is truly the Lamb of God, whose blood has paid for
our sins and has purchased our salvation.

Source consulted and for further reading: Skinner, Christopher, "Another Look at the Lamb of
God"

212
‘God’s messenger and High Priest (Kohen haGadol)
Heb 3:1 the God's messenger and High Priest23

God's messenger:

/the God’s messenger – NLB; /the apostle – most; /the Apostle – NASB, KJV; [‘apostle’ gives
wrong word association as for His disciples.]

Gk. apostolos ‘the one who is sent’ – messenger, agent. Yeshua as God’s agent – the one sent
from and came from Father – is a prominent theme in G-Jn.

The High Kohen (Heb.) /> the High Priest; > the high priest; [Cf. 'chief kohanim' (chief
priests) e.g. Mk 8:31]

Cf. The “witnesses of YHWH” in Isa 43:10-12 refers to His chosen people.
Jehovah’s Witnesses took their title out of these verses. The only true witness to
YHWH is Yeshua Himself.

YHWH and Yeshua do not and cannot refer to the one and same. There are a few (e.g.
Ralph Wilson etc.) who try to convince themselves that ‘Jehovah means I AM’, ‘Jesus is
Jehovah’, but never get to the point of saying ‘Christ is Jehovah’! The so-called ‘I Am’
statements in G-Jn are simply misunderstood. A (calling or descriptive) title (such as
‘God’, ‘Savior’, ‘Lord’, ‘the Shepherd’, etc.) is different from a name, as a same title can
have many different referents. Such an outlandish illogical claim is not worthy for any
further consideration, though it brings the ultimate theological insights to light, that is,
(1) the relation between YHWH Elohim and Yeshua His Mashiah (> Messiah), and
(2) who Yeshua Mashiah is.

‘the Word’ [the Logos]; 'the Word of Elohim' (the Word of God'
[See 'Appendix Jn 1.1 – translation and interpretation]

The ‘Word of Elohim' ('the Word of the God' > 'the Word of God'; or ‘the Word’) is used as a title of Yeshua
Mashiah in NT. Yes, he is called the Word of Elohim; not that He is the Word of God, but He is as the Word
of God.

The Word of God cannot be called ‘God’. Any title of a person is not same as the person himself. It is a
description, not an identity. That is, Yeshua is as the Word of God, not identical to the Word. The Logos
(Word) in Jn 1:1 is not ‘God’ or ‘God the Son’. The Logos is the Word of Elohim, it is not ‘Jesus’, nor it is
‘Christ’.

The Word ░░ (S3056 masc. ho logos) //1Jn 1:1; 5:7b v.l;

[= H1697 dabar (Psa 33:6); Aramaic memra. Cf. wisdom Hebrew ‫ חכמה‬ḥokhmah (H2451 Pro
3:19; 8:22-31) – personified as the agent (in creation work & revelation).]
[← H1697 dabar (Aramaic memra)]
[= the word of YHWH Psa 33:6 (≈ to rhēma – the saying of YHWH Isa 55:11, 1Pet 1:25)]
[Cf. Heb. hokma ‘wisdom’ as a personified agent Pro 3:19; 8:22-31]

213
Here, the word is capitalized because it is simply the very word of God, not because it should
be understood as a person – God as in Trinitarian mindset, even as a god (NWT), but it is seen
in the text of Jn 1:3 as if it is the agent of God's Creation. [Cf. personification] The text of Jn
1:9-10 refers to the New Creation by the Word → the Light → Yeshua Mashiah.
/the [God's] Word – IRENT
/the Word – most;
/the word – REV (- too ambiguous – what word, which word, whose word?) The definite
article in English is much less 'definite' than the article in Greek);
/the logos – Moffatt;
['the Word' is not an abstract notion or something apart from God, but the very word of God,
i.e. specifically, the God's utterance, expressing His will & thoughts in His creation &
revelation. (Hence, capitalized). Not 'message' or 'speech'] [It does not mean ‘reason’ or
‘organizing principle of everything’ as used by the Greek philosophy.]

[Connected to Gen 1:1 – 'in beginning of God's creation, it is the God’s Word (Gen 1:3) in
Genesis creation. (See Heb 1:3).
[What it is not:
• a 'Person' (from Latin persona ‘actor’ ‘role’). Hence, it should take pronoun 'it' in the
subsequent verses as in Tyndale Bible, not 'he' as in most Bible translations.
• 'God the Son'
• 'eternal or pre-existent Son of God’
• 'pre-existent Jesus' before his virgin birth of Church myth.

[Gk. 'logos' is used in the title for Yeshua — 'the Word of Life’ 1Jn 1:1; ‘the Word of Elohim’
Rev 19:13; [→ 'bread from the heaven' Jn 6:33, 38; 41];
Cf. Yeshua Mashiah = the wisdom of Elohim 1Co 1:24, 30. (Cf. Lk 11:49; Cf. 7:35; 1Co 1:21;
Rm 11:33; Eph 3:10). However, a title does not mean an identity. 'The Word' is not Yeshua
himself. [Cf. 'the seed stands for the Word of Elohim' in Lk 8:11.]

'became as flesh' = 'became embodied' Jn 1:14 sarx egeneto ('became as flesh') [Vide infra
'*incarnation']:
"Incarnate Word" ("Incarnate Logos", not 'God Incarnate' or 'Incarnate God') in Jn 1:14 tells
the embodiment of the very God's Word in the person of Yeshua as the 'bread of Elohim'
(Jn 6:33); 'bread of the life' (Jn 6:35, 48), 'bread from the heaven' (Jn 6:32) = his 'flesh to
eat' which he offers to his follows (Jn 6:51, 53-56). Not 'God' became a human being, to be
born of a virgin, as a demigod or a so-called god-man. This is thematically related Yeshua
being Immanuel, not the unbiblical 'virgin birth'.
'demigod' – a being who is partly mortal human, party divine god as in mythology.
'divine person' – someone with divine quality. 'God is divine' is oxymoronic, just as 'father is fatherly'.

Ref. https://dustinmartyr.wordpress.com/2014/01/02/jesus-as-the-embodiment-of-the-logos-john-114/
[a copy in the folder <John 1 - Word, With God, Became as Flesh> in the zip <IRENT Vol. III -
Supplement (Collections #3A.1 - God, Yeshua, & Names)>]

Various rendering of 'Logos' here:

214
/word – REV, CLV, Bishops; /worde – Tyndale; (uncapitalized and taking the pronoun 'it');
/Word – IRENT (takes the pronoun 'it')

/Word – most (takes the pronoun 'he')

/x: Logos - Mft (- transliterate. As an English word it is misleading translation with Gk.
philosophical idea, devoid of Hebraic mindset.)
/the Expression of [divine] Logic - ALT expansion;
/xxx: (In the beginning was) the one who is called the Word – CEV;
/xxk: the Word (Christ) – AMP;
/xx: Speech – UPDV; /xx: Spokesman;

/xxx: (When everything began) the Word was already existed – TNT;

/fn. Or, the Logos (Expression, Message) – NT in Plain English;

/xxxx: Cosmic Christ – Bil Holton (Metaphysical Bible) (-baloney);

/xx: (In the beginning) the Message (already existed) – www.greekingout.com (Dewayne Dulaney);
/xx: The message was in the beginning. - Little Watchman Translation;
/xx: 道 (dào) – Chinese [ - cf. 'The Way' Jn 14:6].
/xxx: self-expression” – in various commentaries (references to be collected)
/xxx: Logic (a divine, rational mind);

The Word of Elohim ('the Word of God')

EE Jn 1:1 the Word [of Elohim] ░░ \ho logos; //1Jn 1:1; 5:7b v.l; /the word – REV; /the Word – most; /the Logos –
Moffatt;
[= 'the Word of Elohim' (used as a title in Rev 19:13 for the risen Yeshua Mashiah)];
[= 'the Word of the Life' (1Jn 1:1) → 'bread from the heaven' Jn 6:33 = 'bread of Life' Jn 6:48 = figurative 'flesh' of
Yeshua Jn 6:51, 53];
[It is not an abstract notion of Greek philosophy or a certain being apart from God. It is the word of utterance; here the
very word of God expressing His will & thoughts in His creation & revelation. (Hence, it is capitalized). Not 'message'
or 'speech'];
[= the word of YHWH Psa 33:6 (≈ rhēma – the saying of YHWH Isa 55:11, 1Pe 1:25)] [← H1697 dabar (memra in
Aramaic)]
[Cf. Heb. hokma ‘wisdom’ as a personified agent Pro 3:19; 8:22-31] (cf. wisdom of Elohim 1Co 1:21)

[Not a 'Person'; nor ‘God the Son’, ‘eternal Son of God’, or 'Jesus' preexistent before his virgin birth of church myth,
nor archangel Michael.]

Concordance: The word of Elohim (or the word of God)

Mk 7:13; Lk 11:28
Act 4:32; 6:2, 7; 8:14; 11:1; 12:24; 13:5, 7, 44, 46, 48; 16:32; 17:13; 18:11;
1Co 14:37; 2Co 2:17; 4:2; 1Th 2:13; 2Ti 2:9; Col 1:25; Heb 4:12; 13:7; Rm 9:6; Tit 2:5
1Jn 2:14;
2Pe 3:5
Rev 1:2, 9; 6:9; 19:13; 20:4;

Cf. 'God's word'; 1Tim 4:5 1Pe 1:23

cf. 'God's utterance' Eph 6:17; Heb 6:5 rhēma S4487)

215
'Who is Jesus', 'Who was Jesus',

Who is He to whom? What is he? 'Where is He now' Who/what has He become in Church
language? vs. 'who was Yeshua in the New Testament'?

'Jesus' people believe – 'believe Him as Mashiah (> Messiah >> Christ)', but what 'Christ' –
Christ of Christian Churches? Or, believe as 'the promised Mashiah – the anointed one by
Elohim' → to be called 'son of Elohim')?' 'Jesus who became God' – ‘Son of God’ turned ‘God
the Son’ who came down from the heaven.

Yeshua was addressed as Master (Sir), *Rabbi, Master, Teacher, Chief.

As Teacher¡/master didaskale (Mt 8:19 etc.)

As Master¡ Sir¡ Lord¡ Gk. Kurie (vocative)
As Rabbo[u]ni¡ Mk_10:51; Jn_20:16
As Rabbi¡ [meaning ‘my great one (master)’]; Mt 26:25, 49; Mk 9:5; 11:21; 14:45; Jn 1:38;
49; 3:2, 26; 4:31; 6:25; 9:2; 11:8; (none in G-Lk). [in iterant rabbi – teaching the lessons of
life in the kingdom reign of Elohim from the very word ('torah') of Elohim – no Midrashic
interpretation as by rabbi or 'sofer' (> scribe – KJV) S1122 grammateus Mt 5:20]
As Teacher (Mt_8:19; 12:38; 19:16; 22:16, 24,36; Mk_4:38; 9:17,38; 10:17, 20, 35; 12:14,
19,32; 13:1; 14:14; Lk_3:12; 7:40; 9:38; 10:25; 11:45; 12:13; 18:18; 19:39; 20:21, 28, 39;
21:7; 22:11; Jn 8:4; 11:28; 13:13, 14). [Rabbi is in a position of religious teacher and guide
in Judaism.]
As *Chief¡ (Gk. epistata) – Lk 5:5 ░░ /> instructor – NWT, KIT; /master – most; /mentor –
Richard Brown & Christopher Samuel (Ref. The Meaning of Kurios in the New Testament –
sil.org); /
[BDAG p. 381 epistatēs – in Lk six times in the voc. epistata as a title addressed to Jesus,
nearly always by the disciples (the synoptic parallels have Didaskale, Kurie, hRabbi) master
Lk 5:5; 8:24, 45; 9:33, 49; 17:13] [See Supplement – Glossary-Person for word study on
vocatives ‘Master, lord, Lord, Sir, Instructor/Chief; fellow, friend]

216
 as the King – [Cf. Mashiah as a Mashiah-King]; Mt 21:5; Jn 18:36; Rev 17:14; 19:16 (‘Lord of
lords; King of kings’); cf. ‘King of the Yehudim (> King of the Jews)’ (Mt 2:2; 27:11); cf. YHWH as
the King (Ps 95:3)
as the High Priest – Eph 5:2; Heb 2:17; 3:2; 5:6; 6:20; 7:21; 9:26-27;
as the Prophet – Mk 6:15; Lk 13:13; 24:19; Mt 13:57; 21:11; cf. Lk 4:17-21, 24;

as Rabbi – Mt 26:25, 49; Mk 9:5; 11:21; 14:15; Jn 1:38, 49; 3:2, 26; 4:31; 6:25; 9:2; 11:8;
as the Apostle (the one sent by God as to be on a mission) – Heb 3:2;
as ‘Lord of Shabbat-rest’ – Mt 12:8.
as 'King of Israel' – Jn 1:49; 12:13; Mk 15:31; Mt 27:42;
Savior of Israel – Act 13:23

Cf. ‘testimony on Yeshua’ (rather than ‘of Yeshua’) – Rev 19:10

Cf. Within the NT text the translated phrase ‘King of the Jews’ belongs to the outsider’s voice (like
Roman or other Gentile people, and astrologer-magi in G-Mt) within the narratives

Yeshua said who he himself was; -

• the son-of-man (x 82) – Jn 6:27 etc. (as the circumlocution of ‘I’. Focus is not on being a mere mortal
human as such, but on being of full humanity. See Appendix *Son of Man)
• son of Elohim (x 5) – Jn 10:36 etc. (of full *divineness)a; also as a Messianic title. Note: ‘son’ is not
capitalized in order to remove a wrong connotation of ‘God the Son’ (the Heavenly Son = pre-human
Jesus).

Yeshua admitted who he was; He did not claim that he was.

• the Mashiah (x 4) – Jn 4:25. (Note: Jn 17:3 the phrase ‘Yeshua as Mashiah’ is in the voice of the
Evangelist).

Yeshua called Elohim as His Father:

• To Mariam the Magdalene: I’m to ascend to my Father, yes, your Father; and to my Elohim, yes,
Elohim of you-all. (Jn 20:17)

[He said: “You are to worship YHWH, your Elohim, and Him only you are to serve.” (in reply to the
Devil Lk 4:8)

Yeshua said about His relation to Father:

[word problem – ‘*identical’ ‘equal’ ‘like’ ‘similar’; *identity, be a same person; vs. be of same
essence/character’. Sameness of a single entity]/person vs. sameness btw two entities (things vs. persons).
‘Two persons are same’ – but not of identity.

• My Father is greater than I (Jn 14:28)

• The words which you hear are not mine but are the words of the Father which sent me. ( Jn 14:24)
• I do nothing of myself; but as my Father has taught me, I speak these things. (Jn 8:38)
• The Father is in/with me. (Jn 14:11)

Things He did not say about who He was. Many of these are irrelevant:

a
In a royal court, the son of the King is also 'king'. He is as king as the King is. The only-begotten son of
Elohim is as 'God' as Elohim is, but not 'the God'.
217
 • He did not say he himself was the same and identical with the Father – (as shown an absurd non-
biblical statement in an anti-Trinitarian rhetoric.)
• He did not say he himself was a god; nor did he say he was an angel.
• He did not say he himself was alive somewhere before he was born.
• He did not say he = the Word = the spoken word of God. He was a bringer of the good news
(‘evangelizer’) of God’s Kingdom; a spokesman, messenger, prophet of God – God as his Father.

Things He did not say about who He was. These are confessed by others of the person
Yeshua and the risen Lord:

Trinitarian 'Jesus' -
• He was born of the virgin Mary without any sexual relation to a man.
• He was eternal. (cf. No mortal human is ‘eternal’)
• He was the Word of God' – 'became flesh', a human being but not human person, as 'divine
person' as if a demigod or god-man.
• He was God the Son before he was born; then became 'the Son of God'

Yeshua on His part never said He was one of the three persons of the so-called Trinity: (See
above ‘Trinity’)
• He did not say the holy spirit as a ‘person’, with three of them (Father, Son, Holy Ghost)
somehow and somewhere occupying each in one’s own place (throne) and act as if in
consultation mode.

[See elsewhere for Jn 20:28 ‘ho Kurios mou kai ho Theou mou!’ (‘the Master of me and Elohim of me’ >
'My Lord and my God'). Thomas exclaimed when he saw the risen Master, not God-man.]

218
The question and answer on "Who IS Jesus" is different from the question and answer on "Who he WAS".
'Who he IS' concerns about a figure in Church which proclaims him as to who-he-is to the Church. On the
other hand, "Who he Was" is about the figure whom the New Testament proclaimed as to who-he-is to the
audience of the NT message. 'Jesus is Jesus' – linguistically speaking, as each one has a different picture of
him. [Same as /God/ - 'God problem' 'God is not God?'.]

"Jesus of religion"a ('Jesus' of Constantine Roman Christianism tradition) is a different figure

from the Yeshua in the Gospel’b who was encountered and experienced by His followers for
whom the real Yeshua was being revealed. Yeshua is presented by the Apostles and Paul
differently from the Gospels.

"Believe Jesus"? → Which Jesus? What Jesus? Whose Jesus? – Jesus of Catholics, of Protestants,
of Jehovah's Witnesses, of Charismatics, of Mormons, of prosperity gospel, etc.? What does it
mean by 'believe'? 'believe in'? Worship him? What does it mean by 'worship'?

IRENT work is about this Yeshua of the Gospel from whom the real Yeshua is to be revealed to
everyone who believe in Him. Being faithful to His original Hebrew name, IRENT renders His
name as ‘Yeshua’ for a new translation of the NT, not as ‘Jesus’c whom no one can be sure and
agreed upon which Jesus, who Jesus was, who Jesus is, and whose Jesus.

The NT presents Him as the one believed as the very Mashiah (Messiah), the one promised to
come in the OT.d

'Yeshua haYehudi' [>> 'Jesus, the Jew'] [he was; one of the Torah-abiding Yehudim (> 'Jews'); not
a Christian; not belonged to a Christian church; not the founder of Christianity (= Constantine
Roman Christianism with its offspring, Protestant Churches)].e
[See EE on His exalted name (Phi 2:9) 24] [For a Brief Timeline of His life, see in the Appendix.]

The Hebrew ‫ ישוע‬is pronounced Yeshua. There is no linguistic or historical literary support
for such rendering as Yahshua (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahshua) or other similar ones,
Yahoshua. www.yashanet.com/library/Yeshua_or_Yahshua.htm It seems to be an
etymological fallacy to put ‘Yah’ in the name – to make a theophoric name. [The name
Yeshua itself does not have a theophoric element from YHWH with the pronunciation as
‘Yahuah’ (Cf. Yahueh > Yahweh; /xx: Jehovah).] www.perfect-word.org/2011/08/23/the-
unholy-war-of-names-yeshua-vs-yahshua

[not Yahushua; Yahushuah; Yahshua Yahshuah (of 'pentagrammaton')]

[‘Yahushua’ is a modern conflated spelling to make His name a theophoric one.

a
'Jesus of religion', 'Jesus of Church', 'Jesus of the New Age Gospel', 'Catholic Jesus' 'Protestant Jesus' Jesus
of historical quests', 'Kosher Jesus' 'Real Kosher Jesus' 'God Jesus' – all products out of human construct each
theology creates its own Jesus who is believed by its own group. How much of 'Jesus figure' which is believed
is actually for the Yeshua figure in the Synoptic Gospels, in the Johannine writings and in Pauline Epistles?
b
as in the four canonical Gospels – written down, interpreted, transmitted, and translated.
c
For IRENT work, the word 'Jesus' as such appears only outside the translated text of the NT, usually put in
quotation marks.
d
How far is 'Christ' of Christian religions or 'Messiah' of the rabbinic or Messianic Judaism divergent from
the Mashiah Yeshua of the Gospel – it depends on how far their doctrines of human construct and their
practices are from what the Scripture tells.
e
www.jewishvoice.org/learn/10-biggest-lies-about-yeshua-his-jewishness-and-what-some-call-jewish-
christianity [a copy in IRENT Vol. III Collections]
219
 Cf. Sacred Name Movement; aka The Hebrew Roots Movement
https://youtu.be/VZtWlmjH35w; https://youtu.be/NcDOmOOQTtA;
www.yashanet.com/library/yeshua_or_yahshua.htm
www.sacredname.com/Articles/Books/Did-Jesus-Speak-the-Name-Yahweh/ [contra sacred name
movement]

Greek transliterate – There is no sound ‘J’ or letter ‘J’ in the Greek. The final ‘s’ is
nominative case ending for a masculine noun. The vowel ē is long ‘e’, not ‘ee’ as in Jee or
Gee.
Cf. http://jesusisajew.org/YESHUA.php
https://jewsforjesus.org/answers/an-introduction-to-the-names-yehoshua-joshua-yeshua-
jesus-and-yeshu/
Cf. http://www.eliyah.com/names.html

English word ‘Jesus’ was originally ‘Iesus’ (KJV-1611) from Latin Iesus which was from
Greek Iēsous (with the terminal s simply indicating the nominative case) which in turn from
Heb. Yeshu, shorten form of Yeshua, a common Hebrew name in 1st c. which itself is a
shortened form of Yehoshuah. [Ref. Nehemiah Gordon (2008), The Naming of Jesus in Hebrew
Matthew.]

'J' was a glypha for Gothic font for capital letter 'I'. The phonetic sound j came into English in
mid 17c. [See below for The History of J.] A name should only be transliterated with
pronunciation kept close to the original. Same for all proper nouns (names of person, people,
place) they need to be transliterated into another language by transcription.

In different languages it is variously transcribed and pronounced. 25 The word ‘*Jesus’ in

English (and similar ones in European languages) is linguistically anachronistic and
theologically disconnected from who He was and who He is. Confusingly it is de facto
equivalent to the name of Christian God.b [See under ‘Jesus as God’ 'God Jesus'] [Note: the
‘Jesus of religion’ (or Jesus of church) is only one among many as it is of human construct; he
is not same as Yeshua of the Gospels.] Yeshua was not ‘Jesus’. Yeshua is not same as ‘Jesus’c.
/Jesus/ is a theological construct, being presented diversely as a different /Jesus/ produced
being dressed up by varied theologies A gradual but eventual consequence of the name being
disconnected from what His name should be is well shown many faces of different Jesus
created in the image of futile (often debased) human mind. It is not even possible to think of ‘real
Jesus’, as long as it is ‘Jesus’. The real person is not known other than by the name ‘Yeshua’, which

a
A glyph as a letter in the alphabet does not have the same sound value in different languages. IPA symbol
for the sound of 'y' itself is /j/.
E.g. English 'yes' is 'ja' in German, which is pronounced as 'ya'. 'Yugoslavia' is Jugoslavija ["jug" (south) and
"slaveni" (Slavs)] in their language with 'j' pronounced as 'y'.
b
‘God Jesus’ – e.g. the expressions and statements – ‘Jesus is God’; ‘The name of (our) God is Jesus’; ‘God
the Son’; ‘worshipping’ Jesus, etc. Q: worshipping and praying to ‘God the Holy Spirit’?
c
In contrast to His true name Yeshua, the name in English ‘Jesus’, who is thought as a God-man
once lived, is also labeled as the ‘second person of Godhead’ or ‘God the Son’ (= ? the Second God)
according to the doctrinal tradition of Constantine Catholic Church. All this is contrary to the plain
statements of the Scripture. ‘Jesus’ is not Yeshua of the Scripture, but a reconstructed westernized
Jesus of 'Christanisms'. [Note that the expression ‘Son of the God (Elohim)’ in the Scripture is a
title for the Mashiah of YHWH. It has nothing to do with the phrase ‘God the Son’ in the Trinitarian
doctrine.]
220
 should be the name on the English translation Bibles. See EE on the question of ‘real Jesus’ and
‘historical Jesus’ here.26

The Hebrew name (‫ישוע‬, with the vowel pointing ‫ – י ֵשּוע‬yēšūă‘) (Yeshuaa) [pronounced ‘ye-
SHU-a’] was one of the most common male names in the Land of Israel, at the time of the
Second Temple Period in Jewish history [580 BC – 70 CE], tied with Eleazer (> Lazarus) for
fifth place behind Shimon (> Simon), Yosef (> Joseph), Yehudah (> Judah), and Yohanan
(> John). Nearly one out of ten persons known from the period was named Yeshua, which
appears in OT in English Bibles as ‘Jeshua’ – e.g. Ezr 2:2; 2Ch 3:15.
[Cf. ‘Yeshu’ (abbr. as Y.S.) – a “play” on His correct name that is actually an acronym
standing for derogatory Hebrew phrase Yimmach Shemo Ve-zikro ('May his name and
memory be blotted out') or yimakh shemo ('May his name be obliterated').]

a
Yeshua - [Cf. The form ‘Yeshu’ (prob. a Galilean dialect according to David Flusser) appears in Talmud.]
221
Who was Yeshua?
Note: Most well-known and revered person who was not a Christian – his name is not ‘Jesus’.

He was a human being, a human person, a man; a Torah-observant Yehudi.

He was a genuine man (not demigod or God-man or Incarnate God),
He was 'divine'
He was not a deity; had no 'divinity' but divineness.
As the son of Elohim, he carried out the will of Elohim his Father – the embodiment of the Word of
Elohim.
The risen and exalted Lord, Lord of Life.

A typical Christian pesher is on Isa 9:6 – taken as a Messianic prophecy with several titles put on
'Jesus'; no NT author took this to be applicable to Yeshua. ['a wonderful adviser' – 'the mighty
(/powerful) god [Heb. el]', 'the Everlasting Father', 'the Prince of Peace'] That someone has same titles
as God's does not make him a God, e.g. 'Savior'. The title 'creator' as to Yeshua is not be of the
Genesis Creation but of the New creation. A title is not for identity.

He was called in the NT:

• Never been called 'God'.
• Never called himself ‘God’ (Check for a few texts such as Jn 20:28 how it is often read out of
the context to make him ‘God’, i.e. 'God Jesus')
• Never called himself ‘Adonai’ (= YHWH).
• Rabbi! -a teacher of Torah in Judaism [Note: Not ordained like Catholic priests or Christian
pastors.]
• Teacher! Master! (for the disciples during His earthly mission)
• Lord! (as the risen Mashiah Yeshua, exalted to the right of Elohim) – not into tone of Lord
God, but Master of our Life in Him.
He and his movement may only be understood within the context of the Yehudism (the Second
Temple Judaism) of their time: that has long been a truism of biblical scholarship. [Ref. Chilton et al.
(2002), The Missing Jesus – Rabbinic Judaism and the New Testament.]

Not 'of (full) divinity of a deity'; but of 'divineness'; fully human, not mere human, but exalted by
Elohim (Phi 2:9-11); 'fully divine' – what does it mean? What does it mean 'divine nature' 'divine
essence' (hypostasis).

222
Heb 1:4 [the Son …] who made the world-orders

/made the systems of things – NWT

/> made the worlds – KJV)
/x: made the world (NET),
/xx: created the world' (ESV);
/xx: 'made the universe (NIV, HCSB), etc.
Col 1:16
1:15
The exalted risen Son is a visible expression
of the invisible Elohim, [2Co 4:4; Cf. Heb 1:3]
 — as pre-eminent firstborn [v. 18] over all creation, [Cf. Rev 3:14]
1:16
since it is in him [the firstborn] [Rm 8:29]
that all the things were created [anew] [Cf. 2Co 15:17; Eph 2:10]
in the heavens and on the earth;
the visible and the invisible
— whether they are thrones or dominions
or rulers or authorities — [Eph 1:10, 21, 3:10; cf. 1Co 15:24-25, Col 2:10, 15]
all the things have been created
through him and for him [for his kingdom reign] [v. 13];
1:17
yes, it is He who is [now] before [and above] all things
and in him all the things hold together.

223
Who is Yeshua in the Bible? Who was Yeshua – 'historical Jesus'?

‘Yeshua in the Bible' 'Yeshua of the Gospels’ – not same as 'Jesus' of Religion/Church.
1. Yeshua the Nazarene in the Gospels and in the history:
Gk. Iesous ho Nazōraious (> Jesus of Nazareth) [‘called Nazarene’ Mt 2:23] [Cf. the sect of
Nazarenes (tōn Nazōraiōn haireseōs – Act 24:5)]
• Yeshua the Nazarene: Mt 26:71; Mk 1:24; 10:47; 14:67; 16;6; Lk 4:34; 18:37; 24:19; Jn
1:45; 18:5, 7; 19:19; Act 2:22; 6:16; 10:38; 22:28; 26:9;
• Yeshua Mashiah the Nazarene: Act 3:6; 4:10
2. an itinerant Galilean rabbi, teaching and proclaiming the Kingdom reign of Elohim, whom
He called out ‘Abba!’ (Father) and told the disciples to do likewise ('Our Father' Mt 6:9).

3. a Yehudi; from the line of King David, son of Yosef (Jn 1:45), *son of Davida (Mt
1:1); a ‘carpenter’ after his father Yosef.
4. son of Mariam; (Mk 6:3); mother, Mariam (Mt 13:55); born of Mariam (wife of Yosef
(Mt 1:16, 20); born of a woman (Gal 4:4), not 'born of Mary Ever-Virgin'.b

He was not a Christian as all the followers of him were not Christians, who were the
Gentile Hellenistic Christian after Paul's missions. He was not a person belonging to
(Greco-Roman) Christians.

Cf. 'Yeshua Mashiah' vs. 'Mashiah Yeshua' (Pauline unique expression; outside the
Paul's writing, it appears 3x as Mashiah {Yeshua} in Act 5:42 v.l.; 24:24 v.l, 1Pe 5:10
v.l.)

Jesus? Which Jesus? Whose Jesus? Yeshua of the Gospels in close parallel to Historical
Yeshua; different from Jesus of Constantine Roman Christianism and Catholic-Protestant
God Jesus.
"Who Yeshua is" – that's the most important question for those who read the Scripture. One
thing is clear: we cannot come up with plausible answers picked from a verse here and a
verse here. It has to be read in totality. One cannot rely on eisegesis, exegesis, or
pesher/midrash. We cannot naively superimpose Yeshua on the OT text verses. We cannot
naively superimpose Jesus of Church on the NT text verses. 'Who He is' should come out of
the Scripture as guided by the written Word of Elohim, not from the formulations or
proclamations by theologians and church authorities.
He was not a 'Jew' (anachronistic); He was an Israelite. He was one of Yehudim (not
'Jews'). He was not a 'Christian', nor he was the founder of a religion, called 'Christianity'.

• Divinity of Yeshua – being divine – embodiment of God's word (Jn 1:1) and God's will
(Mt 6:10; 12:50; Jn 4:34; 5:30; 6:38, 39, 40; 7:17; 9:31). [Yeshua became to be
'worshiped' as God, in the post-Gospel times, among the 'Christians' (of Act 11:26; not
of the later Constantine Roman Christianism), not as the God ('Elohim')].

a 'Son of David' (a messianic title): Mt 22:42 //Mk 12:35 //Lk 20:41. Also Mt 1:1, 20; 9:27; 12:23; 15:22;
20:30, 31; 21:9, 15; Mk 10:47, 48; Lk 3:31; 18:39. Cf. 2Sam 7:2. [← only as 'Seed of David' Act 13:22-
23; Rm 1:3; 2Tim 2:8. Cf. Act 2:30; Cf. Jer 22:30]
b
'virgin birth myth' – virginal conception – born of the Catholic' 'Ever-Virgin Mary' – without the intervention
of human seed (without a human father). This would make him a demi-god or god-man – common in
mythology.
224
• Deity of Jesus – is an unbiblical church product (worshiping '*God Jesus' of Jesus
religion).

Note: The title 'God' (Gk. theos, but not Heb. Elohim), which is actually for YHWH Elohim, is used
for 'Jesus' of the Church from the early Church history of Christianity - creating consequent
confusion/argument on the identity of 'Jesus' with a doctrine of 'pre-existing son of God'), his relation
to Elohim the Father ('God the Father)' and his ontological nature (human vs. divine) in the Trinitarian
theology of the Church, having metamorphosed 'the Son of God' into the unbiblical notion of 'God the
Son' in line with 'God the Father' at the same time also 'the holy spirit' into God the Holy Ghost' (KJV
lingo). Note: on the problem of the word 'God' in English within and without the Biblical text.

Sinlessness of Yeshua - 1Jn 3:5; 2Co 5:21; 1Pe 2:22; Heb 4:15; 1Pe 1:19; Jn 8:29, 46;
Cf. Lk 1:35; Cf. Isa 53:9. [Related to his obedience and faithfulness to Father through
trials and suffering with the authority from Elohim His Father – not because he was/is
God or fatherless (born of 'Ever Virgin Mary', Queen of Heaven). Related to 'holiness',
'the Holy & Righteous' Act 3:14; 'being the son of Elohim' 'the Lamb of Elohim' – Jn
1:29]. That it is possible for Yeshua forgives sins is not because he was God, God-man,
demigod which in turn was only possible to be born of a virgin so that he was 'sinless'
– as God the Son to be put into the womb of the Ever-Virgin Mary of Catholic Church.
No, it is because his Father Elohim bestowed on him, the only-begotten Son, with His
authority.

Yeshua who died on the 'Cross': He was a man, humanity; not God, demigod,
God-man, or a god.

monophysitism Apollinarianism Eutychianism

Sabellianism,
Arianism,
Nestorianism
Psilanthropism

Cf. Quest for the historical Jesus will go on, with each fanciful work trying to re-create
‘Jesus’ according to their liking. It is not an honest quest but a re-creating the image of
‘Jesus’ which they can accept and deal with.

Quest for the historical Jesus. Cf. Albert Schweitzer (1906), Geschichte der Leben-Jesu-
Forschung, "History of Life-of-Jesus Research", translated into English as ‘Quest for
the historical Jesus’ by William Montgomery (1910).
The Historical Jesus and Christian Theology by N.T. Wright (1996)
New Quest for Historical Jesus Draws Skeptics, Scholars (2008)

Ref. Thompson and Verenna, Ed., (2012) “Is This Not the Carpenter?” – The Question
of the Historicity of the Figure of Jesus. (See the review on BAR (2014 Jan/Feb)
www.biblicalarchaeology.org/reviews/is-this-not-the-carpenter/

The “minimalist” position: … historical “maximalism” distorts the “theological message

of the text by transforming it into historical source materials” when, in fact, it is not
historically oriented and cannot yield historical data.

225
 [another one from atheists] Zindler and Price, et al. (2013) Bart Ehrman and the Quest of
the Historical Jesus of Nazareth – An Evaluation of Ehrman’s Did Jesus Exist?]

‘Jesus problem’ – 1. Wrong transliterate of Yeshua; 2. It is now a westernized figure from

Constantine Roman Christianism for last 1600 years; 3. A variety of Americanized Jesusa
for last several hundred years; 4. Nativized in different cultures, languages, religions (e.g.
‘Cosmic Christ’).

Direct communication takes place between Elohim and Yeshua [as seen in G-Mk]:

God addresses Yeshua in 1:11; Yeshua addressing God in 14:36 calling Him as ‘Abba’
and in 15:34 referring to Him as ‘Elohim’. In 9:7 we find the only interaction of God with
the disciples with the important statement: "This is my beloved Son, listen to Him".

Yeshua in all the books of the Bible:

www.menorah.org/Yeshua~Jesus-in-all-the-books-of-the-Bible.pdf
http://youtu.be/c9mF-lXxjB8 From Genesis to Revelation – Tony Evans
http://youtu.be/nieVIurPSbc

*Christophany - www.menorah.org/God_Taking_A_Human_Form.html

The word 'name' associated with Yeshua –

Mt 1:21, 25; 7:22; 10:22; (12:21); 18:5, 20; 19:29; 24:5, 9; Mk 9:37, 38, 39; 13:6, 13;
16:18;
Lk 1:31; 2:21; 9:48, 49; 10:17; 21:8, 12, 17; 24:47;
Jn 1:12; 2:23; 3:18; 14:13, 14, 26; 15:16, 21; 16:23, 24; 20:31;
Act 2:38; 3:16; 4:10, 12, 17, 18, 30; 5:40, 41; 8:12, 16; 9:13, 15, 16, 21, 27, 28; 10:43,
48; 14:10; 15:26; 16:18; 19:5, 13, 16; 21:13; 22:16; 26:10;
Heb 1:4; 2:12; 13:5; Rm 1:5; 1Co 1:2, 10; 5:4; 6:11; Eph 5:20; Phi 2:9, 10; Col 3:17;
2Th 1:12; 3:6; 1Jn 3:23; 5:13; 3Jn 7; 1Pe 4:14; Jam 2:7;

a
Stephen Prothero (2004), American Jesus: How the Son of God Became a National Icon [e.g. Jesus of
President Jefferson; Jesus of Jesus Seminar Fellowship; Mormon Jesus, etc.]
226
"Who I am?" False Claims About ‘Jesus’
The False Claim that Proskyneo Worship demonstrates Jesus is God
[that someone/something is being ‘worship’ does not mean the object of worship is
Elohim the Most-High (YHWH Elohim). What does it mean by ‘to worship’? How
about ‘idol worship’?
How many gods are there to exist in the Bible? Only one? Two? or Three (as
Trinitarian)? Or is it not that we should worship YHWH as the one and only to
‘worship’ – Elohim the Most-High?

The False Claim that Forgiving Sins demonstrates Jesus was God
[what does we mean by ‘sins’ and by ‘forgiving sins’?]

What makes God 'God'? What makes one 'God'? What he has to be or has to do for
him to be 'God'?
The False Claim that Jesus' Miracles demonstrates he was God
[what does it mean by ‘miracles’, by the word used in the most Bible translations?]

The False Claim that the title "Lord" demonstrates Jesus is God
[What does in mean by ‘Lord/lord’ – in common English? in religious and theological
jargon? in Greek? in Hebrew? in what context? Why not take it as ‘Master’ as a
translation word to see what the word actually connotes.]

The False Claim that the term "Son of God" means Jesus is God
[God’s son; vs. the son of Elohim; vs. unbiblical term ‘God the Son’. ‘God-man’?]
What is meant by ‘son’, when the word basically means a male offspring of a father?
How can ‘God’ have ‘son’, as Muslims argue? Figurative? In what sense it is so?

The False Claim that Jesus is "the Angel of the Lord"

[what does it mean by ‘angel’? a messenger? a human one or a divine one (like a
picture of a winged-angel)?

Yeshua asks: ‘Who do you say I am’ (Mk 8:29) – the fundamental and foundational
question of the whole NT and of the very faith in Him.

The corollary is: “Who does He himself say to be – as to who He is’ in the NT.
• He called himself as ‘the son-of-man’ [Gk. ‘the son of the man’ with man as
human, not a male.]
• He himself did not say ‘I am the son of Elohim’ [This expression was not employed
as Yeshua’s self-designation cf. only indirectly in Jn 5:25; 11:4. Cf. Jn 10:36 (a son of
Elohim)
• He himself never said ‘I am God’.

227
The biblical person of Yeshua is not same as Jesus of religion/church, which is a reconstruction
by Constantine Roman Christianism (incl. Roman Catholic, Orthodox, and host of Protestant
offspring).

… What needs explanation is the meaning of the different [descriptive] titles being ascribed
to Yeshua, and especially its relation to the meaning of the life of Yeshua as a whole. It
remains striking that in the New Testament as a whole the term sōter (savior) is used so
seldom, even though the function of Savior is quite obvious in the New Testament …

…and the different titles associated with Yeshua acquire their content from the narrative as a
whole…
… The various Christological titles of Yeshua are not inherently Christological, and also not
unambiguous. [some are titles used for YHWH Elohim; that would not prove that Yeshua is
God or is identical to YHWH.] They obtain their meaning in and through the narrative as
such. It must be kept in mind that the role of the titles must first and foremost be seen in the
context of the characterization in the narrative. This means that we do not have a systematic
Christology in the Gospel, but a narrative presentation.

[Edited with the word change, Yeshua > Jesus; savior > savior. Purple are comments added.
Quoted from
www.religion.emory.edu/faculty/robbins/SRS/combrink/MarkSalvation.pdf ]

A title does tell only about ‘what He is’, not ‘who He is’. A title may have more than one
referent. Indeed, the titles 'God' and 'Lord' were also given to pagan idols and systematically,
it became regarded as NAMES for the idols. Similarly, when people have failed to come the
knowledge of the divine sacred Names, they have been deluded into believing that 'God' or
'Lord' is the Almighty One's Name itself and have it substituted in speech, in writing, and in
thoughts – ultimate having their faith without the Name! [titles – titles for calling (e.g. ‘O Lord!’
‘O Elohim!’) vs. descriptive titles]. They have even a nameless God, the Holy Ghost. [cf. appellation,
title, designation, etc.]

“Jesus is God'? What God? 'God Jesus?' Is he a god' or 'a God'? or “was he a god?”
or "was he an angel" (per JW)"' “When did he become God?” “When he was made
'God'?”
Vocabulary – god, god-being, deity, divine being; divine man; *God-man; demigod; a God disguised as
man; Docetism. Cf. *divinity vs. *divineness, divine nature; divine essence. That someone has ‘divinity’
or divine nature does not make equated as ‘God’ as the reality (e.g. as YHWH is). Divine person? Human
being vs. go-being.

Voc. 'wise man' 'holy man' 'divine man'

[The statement ‘Jesus is God’ (which is a central but confusing statemen of Christians of the
Trinitarian belief) presents a logical quandary, since either of the answer yes or no may be right,
or both may be seen as right, or rebutted – this is all because the statement does not define the
word ‘God’ (why not ‘god’ or even ‘a God’), neither ‘Jesus’ (as to who he was and who he is).
The only response can be either against or for it. Additionally, the word ‘is’ itself is
challenging. In what sense the verb ‘is’ corrects the two – same, identical, like, similar, a part
of, belonging to, related to, etc. Anyone/thing can be (a) god (/God) for some. Jesus can be (a)
228
god (/God) for some. Only the expression ‘Jesus is as God’ can be accepted.a Then we have to
deal with the concept of ‘being God’, ‘being divine’, and ‘divinity’. Note that, from a point
view of logic, the statement ‘someone is divine’ or ‘someone has divinity’ or ‘someone has
fullness of God-being’ is oxymoron and nonsensical if referred to God himself or God-being
itself. The Almighty 'God' (Elohim) is not someone or something the word 'divine' can be put
on! It's like saying to the Sun 'it is bright', whereas no human eyes can peer through the very
light source without getting blinded. Everything we say about Elohim and to Elohim is a
pathetic anthropomorphic children's language – including 'how great thou are'

Ref.
Richard E. Rubenstein (2000) When Jesus Became God: The Struggle to Define Christianity
during the Last Days of Rome
Bart D. Ehrman (2015) How Jesus Became God: the Exaltation of a Jewish Preacher from Galilee
—- (2016) Jesus Before the Gospels: How the Earliest Christians Remembered, Changed, and
Invented Their Stories of the Savior
Richard E. Rubenstein (2000) When Jesus Became God: The Struggle to Define Christianity
during the Last Days of Rome
Michael Morwood (2001) Is Jesus God? Finding Our Faith

a
Cf. When Yeshua rebuked Kefa (Peter), ‘Get behind me, Satan’ (Mt 16:23), it surely is meant
‘Peter as Satan’ (i.e. someone like it), not ‘the Satan’ itself being referred to.
229
[Theological and doctrinal arguments: 'one nature' or two natures'
• Council of Chalcedon: "Christ was vere homo, vere Deus, that is, “truly man
and truly God,” having two natures in one." - what does nature mean??
• monophysite heresy
[Then, what is a binitarian (< dyatic) a relationship between 'Yeshua' and 'YHWH' (rather than ‘Jesus’
and ‘God’), as argued throughout Church history? Here we should note: In all the arguments on the
‘divinity’ ‘divineness’ of ‘Jesus’ (i.e. ‘whether he is/was God’), no clear definition is offered what is
‘God’ and what is ‘Jesus’ – as they are their own metaphysical and theological construct not correspond
to the reality. That’s why everyone is convinced that they are right and others’ position is deficient and
in error.]

[The foremost reason to read the New Testament is to know who Yeshua (believed as) the Mashiah was
and to know what Yeshua said who He was – either to put faith in Him or to deny who He was said to
be in the Scripture –apart from religious teachings by the Church, the Priests, the theologians, etc. All
other reasons are secondary; however, they are important theologically, doctrinally, and ecclesiastically.
Then, the final question is: “who He is – to me”. It is not about ‘God’, which any religion can offer
plausible, enticing, and convincing inspirations.]

[Another but equally important question everyone ought to ask: ‘Who is NOT Jesus?’ Every ‘Jesus’ they
claim him to be, and every Jesus they make out of their reading of the Bible – all these may not be who
He is. Most of Jesus they have is a hodge-podge of syncretic images of a westernized ‘Jesus’. ‘Which
Jesus?’ E.g. ‘God-Man’; ‘God the Son’; human being but not human person, but divine person, a
materialistic shamanic god we can bargain to obtain what we want to have. Jesus Christ of their own
Church, but not Yeshua Mashiah of Elohim in the Scripture?] [Is the question different from a question
‘Was Jesus divine?’ Then another question would be ‘If yes, how so? – Here again we need a working
definition of ‘divine’ before tackling the questions.] Linguistically and literarily all statements are
acceptable: (1) he is a god, (2) he is God, (3) he is a god-being; (4) he is divine or god-ness (? of deity?),
but not (5) he is the God (Elohim YHWH). Depending on who claims and why they do, there may be
great division. However, each one is right on its own and can hardly make others convinced of their
being wrong, with human beings as they are fundamentally pursuing ‘pleasure for themselves’ and
‘power over others’ – totally ‘addicted’ out of human nature and there is no such thing as ‘absolute’
needed to resolve existential dilemma.

[It is undeniable that Yeshua was regarded as more than a simple human person, but also as a God-being
by those followed Him, which is the sense of ‘God’s Son’ or ‘the Son of the God (‘Elohim’). The problem
created by Trinitarian formula is that ‘the Son of God’ became ‘God the Son’, who was with Father from
‘eternity’ (whatever this word might mean); a God-being became God; Jesus became same as Jehovah,
and Jehovah = Jesus; the name of God is now ‘Jesus’ (but what happened to ‘Jehovah). In other words,
it is identity problem – on metaphysical, Greek philosophical, religious and ecclesiastical wrangling,
having far divorced from what the whole Scripture actually says and having instead, bogged down with
pet proof texts.

[“God in Mashiah' (God-being) vs. ‘Mashiah in Elohim’]

a
For the terms ‘byadic/triadic vs. binatrian/trinitarian’ -
https://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2012/09/10/binitarian-dyadic-triadic-early-christian-god-talk-and-
devotion/
230
Trinitarian Rambling on the idea of 'God the Son,

[Below is copied of a commentary on Jn 1:1-3 in The Orthodox Study Bible (2008 with NKJV
text) by St. Athanasius Academy of Orthodox Theology

CHRISTOLOGY

The center of Christianity is the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. In fact, He is the centerpiece
of all history. But the world struggles with His identity. Who is He? Is He God? Is He
man? Both? The Scriptures clearly answer these crucial questions.

In his Gospel, John gives a specific and definitive explanation of who Christ is. “In the
beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (1:1).
John the Baptist, the Forerunner of Christ, revealed God the Word as “the Light” (1:7).
“The Word became flesh and dwelt among us” (1:14). Who then is Jesus Christ?

1. He is God, for He was with God from before all time. Clearly, the One born Jesus of
Nazareth did not have His beginning in His earthly birth. Rather, He is the eternal Son
of God, without beginning. There never was a time when the Son of God did not exist.
[For God's sake, what does it mean by 'God'? – ARJ]
2 He is also man, for He “became flesh.” He has become one of us, being like us in all
things, but without sin.
3 He acts both as God and as man, doing what is appropriate for each nature in the unity
provided by His one divine Person. Never does divine nature and activity become
changed into human nature and activity. The two are in union without confusion. Christ
does, however, “energize” human nature with divine energy so that human nature is
redeemed from sin and death and brought into union with God. He thus “deifies”
humanity

231
‘Jesus as God’; ‘Biblical Yeshua was not God; ‘Christian Jesus is God’ (for
many) 'God Jesus';
In Trinitarian mind he is more than ‘divine man’, he is God-Man, God, but not ‘a God’.
Related unbiblical Trinitarian ideas: ‘Jesus is God’ ‘Jesus became God’, ‘God Jesus’, ‘God the Son’
(contra ‘Son of God’), ‘the second Person of the Godhead’; ‘God-man’; ‘God Incarnate’ (as compared
to ‘Incarnate Logos’ ≈ Immanuel); ‘Jesus existed with God in the beginning of creation’, etc. Still
denying that they are not talking of more than one God with their arithmetic 1+1+1 = 1 x 1 x 1 = 1.

!! Fred Coulter (2006), Harmony of the Gospels – The Life of Jesus Christ. It reads in p. 253
– “The one of Elohim [sic] who created the heavens and the earth became Jesus Christ – God
manifested in the flesh.” www.churchathome.org/a-harmony-of-the-gospels.html

Ref. http://onlytruegod.org/defense/v.taylor_theos.jchrist.htm Does the New Testament Call Jesus God?

Ref. ‘worshiping Jesus’ - http://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/vox/vol12/worship-of-jesus_france.pdf
worshiping Jesus as God? [How about worshiping Maria, the Bible, mammon, one’s own ideology, etc.?]
(‘worship’, ‘bowing down’, ‘adoration’, ‘veneration’, etc.)

The ultimate question for Christians – "Christology": who is Jesus?

Instead of looking into the Scripture of what He himself said who he was and of what the
NT says, but the question is altered as ‘who we think He should be’. The fact cannot be
denied that this image and identity of ‘Jesus’ is a westernized syncretic reconstruct to fit
their theological and doctrinal system of religion and faith – much alien to the biblical
Yeshua of the Apostolic ‘Christianity’.

Despite the plain messages in the Scripture, that he was Mashiah, anointed by God, to
usher in the Kingdom reign of Elohim, many (of Trinitarian mindset) would picture Him
as a second God, God the Son, the Pre-incarnate Son. Some of New Age mindset would
see Him as 'Cosmic Christ'a, a demigod.

Before we can give many acceptable answers to ‘who Jesus is’, there is a question which
should be answered beforehand – ‘which Jesus is in your mind’?

And then, “where is He now?” Up in the ‘heaven’ somewhere? On a throne next to Elohim
YHWH? Next to Mr. Holy Ghost on another throne? How would worship and/or prayer
to find way to ‘God the Father’, to ‘God the Son’, and to ‘God the Holy Ghost’. Or the
God is rather to be pictured, as in Orthodox icons, as a three-headed Person or a three-
faced Person?b

https://youtu.be/WxeKunPwmp4 Jesus the Jew – but what sort of Jew? (Paul Meier)
https://youtu.be/WBTJprIBfkc Rabbi Jesus - Bruce Chilton
https://youtu.be/tddCNY6U77Y The Hebrew Yeshua vs. the Greek Jesus
’

a
‘Cosmic Christ’: Ref. Bil Holton, The Gospel of John: New Metaphysical Version.
Jn 1:1 “Before there was a physical universe [In the beginning] there was the Cosmic
Christ [the Word] …”
b
Cf. Janus, Ianus, a Roman god, two-faced. (< ‘January’, the name of a month).
232
 A common vexing question ‘Is Jesus God?’, or a claim ‘Jesus is God’a, that is 'God
Jesus'b. [How and when Jesus became or made God contrarily to the Scripture. It is
one thing to have 'Jesus' worshiped as God, it is entirely another to say the name of
our God is 'Jesus'. Its ultimate Trinitarian fallout is ‘(The name of) our God is Jesus’
or even ‘Jehovah is Jesus’.
[‘God Jesus’ Iesus Deus. Cf. ‘Jesus religion’ (예수교) vs. ‘Christ religion’ (기독교
基督敎)]
[Cf. Litwa (2014), Iesus Deus: The Early Christian Depiction of Jesus as a
Mediterranean God] (www.biblicalarchaeology.org/reviews/iesus-deus/ book
review) – a copy in the Collection.]

1) Jesus (the Nazarene) was God?

2) Jesus is God? The westernized Jesus is God? [Jesus of Chalcedonian Christ]
3) Was Jesus a God before he was born (a god-man)?

Did He claim to be god or claim the title of God? What “God Jesus” is? What does
it mean when some say ‘Jesus is God’ and what is the point they are driving at? Jesus
= God; Jesus = Jehovah – a fortiori??

Jn 1:1 ‘The Word’ is read as the Son, then read as Jesus to justify the claim that ‘Jesus
is God’. The metaphorical ‘Son of God’ is transformed the metaphysical ‘God the
Son’, a Gnostic concept. – See John Hick, Metaphor of God Incarnate -

Of course, any argument requires definition of the terms used – what is God? c What
does the word God mean and how is it used?

Here, the answer would be one of these: (1) Yes, (2) No, (3) I don’t know. Trinitarians
would say ‘Yes’ while anti-Trinitarians would say ‘No’, both sides with different
reasoning which are not quite antithetical.

a
Similar line of question: ‘’ [by Kermit Zarley
http://focusonthekingdom.org/Zarley.pdf <Does the Bible identify Jesus as God?>
www.godward.org/biblical%20monotheism/2010%20OG.htm <Does the Bible Say Jesus Is God?>
– a rhetorical question. Here again, we would not have much out of arguments unless we settle first
on what does it mean by ‘identify’ and about the notion ‘God’ – all the (necessary or unnecessary)
arguments can be only overcome when we take a fundamental approach – linguistic, literary, and
logical approach to deal with any concepts, ideas, dogmas, and writings that are ever created by human
mind.
b
'God Jesus' = God whose name is Jesus. Cf. 'Jesus God' = God of Jesus.
c
‘what is God?’ ≠ ‘what God is’ (‘what sort of God is’) ≠ ‘which God?’; [God did not create ‘evil’
(evilness); nor did He ‘good’ (goodness). Genesis Ch. 1 simply tells us that what He created –
everything – was ‘good’ for Him to see. Evil takes its root at Adam’s exercising God-given endowment
‘freedom’ to make himself like a god-being, deciding apart from Elohim – which one right and which
is wrong. Cf. ‘know right and wrong’ (Gen 2:9, 17; 3:5, 22. Cf. Heb 5:14); not ‘good and evil’ (most
translations), nor ‘good and bad’ (NWT).
233
 If one claims ‘Jesus is God’, what does it mean? God in disguise (as God of Docetic
god-mana)? 'Jesus is called God'?b
If one insists ‘Jesus is not God’, what does he want to disprove?

Moreover, one has to settle on the question of ‘which Jesus’. Jesus of religion or
Yeshua of the Gospels? ‘what is the person who is called Jesus?’ ‘Who Jesus is’? The
so-called ‘quest of historical Jesus’ dwells mainly over the former, rather than
Yeshua, the Mashiah (anointed one) of YHWH Elohim. Are we dealing with
someone who lived 2000 years ago, known as Yeshua of Nazareth? Or the one who
is believed to exist now as the resurrected ‘Lord’? Or the one who is believed to be
pre-existing before the historical person? As a human person as he should be, some
sees him as only divine person, but not a human person in a Trinitarian word game?
As the word ‘god’ ‘theos’ ‘elohim’ is and has been used to refer to other than ‘God’,
if we forget about capitalization scheme, anyone (or any abstract idea or anything)
can be called ‘god’ (or God), there is nothing wrong to claim ‘Jesus is God’. By the
very same token, there is nothing wrong to assert that ‘Jesus is not God’, because
both understand God differently and the same word spelt mean and connote different.
Even the sematic sense of the sentence is different to different. We are forced to stay
within the Scripture and within the mindset of the writers and their audiences and
have to stay clear of any theological, doctrinal, and even philosophical traditions.
One way to help resolve the dilemma is to find a word to translate Gk. theos. IRENT
finds Elohim, a Hebrew loan, is appropriate and acceptable for translating the
arthrous Gk. ho theos. [Cf. Korean translation words ‘하나님’ vs. ‘하느님’]

The main problem here is linguistic and logic, not theological or doctrinal. People
are not clear at the start about what they mean by different words and terms. Here it
depends on what is meant by ‘God’ and ‘someone is God’ or ‘someone is called
God’. Note that there is no difference between God and god to begin with until when
we take it in a different sense. Moreover, it eventually depends on how everyone
understands the person they call ‘Jesus’. Jesus of Catholicism and Jesus of various
Protestantism are not same. Nor Jesus of Jehovah’s Witnesses or of Mormons are
same. Each sect has its own image of who Jesus is. Such Jesus, westernized and
Christianized, is not same as Yeshua of the Scripture, one way or the other. “Who do
people say that I am?” is the very question with which Yeshua confronted at his
disciples at the beginning of His public ministry. [Mk 8:27 = Lk 9:18; also Mt 16:13]
It ultimately what the word ‘is’ really used in our language – is it ‘Jesus as God’,
rather than ‘Jesus is God’? Calling Jesus God [i.e. 'Jesus as God'] is different from
saying 'Jesus IS God'. [See an attached file titled The Nebulous ‘Is’.]

a
cf. ‘Cosmic Christ’ – Matthew Fox. Cf. https://youtu.be/4LYQQO5uFtA
Cf. Christian mysticism or Mystic Christianity; Cf. the New Age movement (a.k.a. Self-spirituality,
New spirituality). Cf. 'spiritism'. Cf. Mind-body-spirit.
www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/interelg/documents/rc_pc_interelg_doc_20030
203_new-age_en.html#
b
Many claims that 'Jesus is called God'. One proof text which is wrongly read, understood, and
translated is 1Tm 3:16 the one who was revealed ░░ [Referent is ‘Mashiah Yeshua’ v. 13]; /who – most; /x:
God - KJV [← mss Gk. anarthrous theos – ‘a God-being’ ‘what Elohim is’ (= Jn 1:1c). Not the God (Elohim);
not He was called 'God'.]
'in flesh' ░░ 1Tm 3:16 [→ incarnate Logos of Elohim in Jn 1:14. //Phi 2:7-8] [Cf. ‘incarnation' which is
'embodiment' of the Word of Elohim in the person of Yeshua as a true human being, human person, not a god-
being, god-man, demigod, or 'God Jesus'. = ‘Immanuel’ Mt 1:23]; /in the flesh – most; /
234
 Whatever answer is to be, it is incomplete and fails to stand up by itself. It’s because
‘God’ (I say) is not ‘God’ (you say) is not ‘God’ (others say). As discussed on several
occasions in this file, most have a wrong concept of ‘God’ and are unable to
differentiate ‘God’ of generic notion and ‘the God’. Yeshua is NOT the God. He is
not Elohim. But Is Yeshua ‘God’? To be made less ambiguous, we should say
‘Yeshua is as God’. This is similar to the expression ‘Yeshua is equal to Father’ (as
the Judeans correctly perceived when they accused Him – Jn 5:18). Yes, Yeshua is
God-being (= ‘what God is’). However, because of linguistic limit [as long as the
word ‘God’ is being used this way], the expression remains problematic and
impractical because of a deeper problem – tri-theistic idea in the Trinitarian formula.

NT texts used for text proof of Jesus = God (whatever 'God' means) for the
Trinitarians: reading, misreading, mistranslated for eisegesis:
• Tit 1:17 ‘the King ~~~, only and wise God’
• Jn 1:1c (Note: the anarthrous noun theos is to the Logos, not to unbiblical
jargon ‘Jesus, God the Son, or the Second Person of Trinity)
• Jn 20:28 (Note: the arthrous ho theos, which should be Elohim, the Father)

‘Praying to Jesus’?

What does it mean by ‘to pray’? To which Jesus? To whose Jesus?

Greg Stafford on praying to Jesus [http://credohouse.org/blog/greg-stafford-on-praying-to-jesus – a copy in

the collection IRENT Vol. III - Supplement (Collections #3A.2 - on Trinity).

Jn 14:14; Act 1:24- 25; 7:59-60; 9:14; 22:16; Rm 10:12-13; 1Co 1:2; 16:22; 2Co 12:8-9; Rev 22:20-21;

235
‘one God’; Unitarianism, monotheism vs. monaltry [The belief in God in the Scripture
is monaltry – having one true God to worship and turned away from all other gods.

1Co 8:4 [to us] no [other] God but one ░░ (oudeis theos [heteros] ei mē eis) (v. 5~~ there
are so-called ‘gods’); 1 (no God but one): /no God but one – most, NET, ESV trio, NASB,
HCSB, NWT, NIV duo, BBE, TCNT, ASV, DRB, PNT, Cass (- problem of the phrase ‘no
God’ – as if negating God; /x: no one is God, except One – CPDV2009; x: no god but one
– REB;; 2 (/mss – no other God): /no other God except one – ALT, LITV, MKJV, CLV (~
One); /no other God but one – HNV, ISR (~ Elohim), NKJV; /there is none other God
but one – Bishops, Geneva, KJV++; /no other God save one – Darby; /no other God
except for one – ALT; /no other God except one – CLV; /no other God but one – HNV;
/
/there is only one God – NLT, ISV, ERV, CEV, GNB, NIrV, JNT; /x: no god exists except
the one God – GW; /xx: no one God other, if not one – Diagl; /x: no god exists except
the one God – GW; /하나님은 한분 밖에 없는줄 – KRV; /하나님 한분 외에는 다른 신이
없는 줄 – KKJV; /唯一の 神 以外には 神は 存在しないこと – JSS; / 3 (paraphrase): />
there is only one God – JNT, NIrV, GNB, CEV, ERV, NLT, ISV;
(often quoted a few words as ‘there is no God but one’ it gives out an unclear idea.) [Does
this statement deny that there are many gods, as ‘monotheism’ (there is only one God. cf.
monaltry) insists? It is that one believes in one true living God only. The expression ‘false
gods’ does not mean that there are no gods, but gods are not the God you should vow
down.]; [Cf. The statement “(there is only one God;) God, the Father, beside which there
is no god” is by itself incomplete and illogical, as the fact is there are (many) gods. It is
that to us there is only one, the true living God.] [Cf. The expression ‘There is no God but
Allah (as in Shahada of Islam)’; ‘There is no god but God’]

Hebrew word el (LXX – theos; god - English) and elohim (LXX – theoi; gods) are
applied to men – Exo 7:1 (to Moses); Psa 82:6 = quoted in Jn 10:34; also to angels
Psa 8:5 (angels – LXX; elohim – MT);

http://presenttruth.info/is-jesus-god/

The question ‘Is Jesus God’ requires a definition of the word “God” [also the
context it is used – ARJ]. If the word “God” is taken to mean, “the supreme ruler
of the universe, the Most-High God,” then the answer to your question would
have to be no, because the Bible recognizes only one person with these titles, and
Jesus said Himself that His Father is “the only true [original] God.” (John 17:3)

The word “god” has several different meanings. In a very limited sense, men are
called god. Both the Greek word theos and the Hebrew word elohim, which are
most often translated “god,” are used in reference to men. (See Exodus 7:1; Psalm
82:6; John 10:34) When the word “god” is used in that sense, then there are
hundreds and thousands of gods.

236
In a less limited sense, angels are called gods. David wrote about man, “For thou
hast made him a little lower than the angels.” (Psalms 8:5) The word “angels” in
this verse comes from the Hebrew word elohim. The way elohim is used here it
denotes a type of being that is higher than man, but it is still used in a limited
sense, and with this definition there would still be many gods.

In reference to Christ, elohim and theos are used in a much less limited sense, to
denote His nature as being on the same level as His Father—something that
cannot be said about any other being in the universe. The Bible says that Christ
was “in the form of God.” (Philippians 2:6)

But even when the word “God” is used of Christ, it is used in a limited sense,
because Christ has a God who is “the head of Christ,” “above all,” and “greater
than” He. (See 1 Corinthians 11:3; Ephesians 4:6; and John 14:28.) When the
word “God” is used in its absolute and unlimited sense, there is only one Person to
whom it can apply, and that is God, the Father, alone. Jesus said that His Father is
“the only true God.” (John 17:3) Paul said, “there is none other God but one…
God, the Father.” (1 Corinthians 8:4, 6) Of the 1320 times the word “God” is used
in the New Testament, more than 99% of the time it refers exclusively to God the
Father, while it only applies to His Son four times. (John 1:1; John 20:28;
Hebrews 1:8; 1 Timothy 3:16)

So, to clarify, there are many gods when the word “God” is used in a limited
sense, to include men and angels. When “God” is used as an adjective to describe
the nature of God, then there are only two divine beings, God, the Father and
Jesus Christ, His only begotten Son. When the word “God” is used in this sense,
then yes, Jesus is God. The Son of God is completely divine by nature because
His Father is divine, just as I am completely human because my parents are
human. [Cf. Hebrew idiom of ‘a son of ~’ = a person having character of ~’. E.g.
‘son of thunder’.]

When the word “God” is used in its absolute sense, to denote “the Most-High
God,” “the Sovereign of the universe,” or “the only true God,” then there is only
one God, the Father, beside which there is no God.

As for the title θεός, “On the one hand, the dominant Greco-Roman ethos assumed that
there were many gods and that human beings could be deified. Many emperors refused to
be called gods during their lifetimes, yet were named gods after their deaths. The term
“god” was also used for living rulers, like Agrippa (Act 12:21-22; Josephus, Ant. 19.345)
and Nero (Tacitus, Annals 14.15). On the other hand, the Jewish tradition centered on faith
in one God (Deu 6:4), who was not to be portrayed in human form or to be identified with
a human being (Exo 20:4; Deu 5:8; 2 Mac 9:12; cf. John 5:18; 10:33)” (Craig R. Koester,
Hebrews: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary [2001], 202). Further,
one should note that the majority of passages in which Jesus is potentially called θεός
appear in writings attributed to Jewish settings, whereas only a few might be Pauline (see,
e.g., Richard N. Longenecker, The Christology of Early Jewish Christianity [1970], 139).

fr. Jesus as Θεός: A Textual Examination by Brian James Wright)

237
 Related questions re. *person;

'things', 'being' vs. 'person'; human being vs. human person vs. divine person.
'be a person' vs. 'personal'. 'personhood' vs. 'personality'
Identity, essence, nature, hypostasin, ousia, homoosia, etc.

'procession of the Holy Ghost' – highly elaborate phrase for a simply statement in the
Bible – 'Father will send the helper, the spirit of holiness, in Yeshua's name' (Jn 14:26)
('proceed from father and son)

‘was Jesus a human person?’ ‘is he a human person?’ ‘when is a human being a human
person?’ ‘what does it mean by ‘person’? History the term ‘person’ in the Trinitarian
formula from Latin, which is translation word of Greek words. What about ‘a divine
person?’ What do we mean by ‘being’?

http://youtu.be/va_BrSislsE (in the comments: ‘person = self-conscious or rational

being’?? – what does it mean by ‘being’ ‘self-conscious’ ‘rational)???

'Jesus of Church; Yeshua in the Gospels:

'Jesus' – a church lingo in Greek and Western mindset. Not same as Yeshua of the Gospels in Hebraic
mindset. Who was ‘Jesus’? Who is ‘Jesus’? What Jesus? Which Jesus? Whose Jesus? Jesus as Christ?
Jesus who became God? Jesus who is made God? Jesus who was human being, but not a human
person? Jesus, demigod or god-man? All depends on what is meant by 'Jesus' and what is meant by
'God'.

[ https://youtu.be/YW99U4JWNEc Top 10 Reasons Why Jesus is not God - Joshua Evans - TheDeenShow ]

238
 • Mystery of Elohim (Col 2:2; 1:27) [cf. ‘the mystery, the Mashiah’ - Eph 3:4; Col 4:3 = things
hidden until revealed which are held by the Mashiah. Cf. ‘this mystery ~ which is the Mashiah in you’
Col 1:27) – resurrection, ascension, glorification/exaltation, not God coming down to the earth and
walks like man, a pagan Godmana or Gnostic demiurges.]
• Fulfillment of Torah (Mt 5:14) – “End of religion(s)”
• Fulfillment of the Old Covenant and its promises – (Epistles to Hebrews) (Cf. Mt
27:51; 1Co 5:7)
• Embodiment of the Word of Elohim Jn 1:1, 14. Logos - word, self-expression,
utterance, and wisdom of Elohim. (‘became as flesh’)
• A man who has come from God (Jn 3:2; 13:3) entrusted with divine mission (a
divine man, /x: ‘divine Being; /x: ‘Cosmic Christ’); not a God (‘God the Son’) came
walking on earth as ‘God-man’ (pagan idea).
• The living bread from heaven Jn 6:51 (→ his own ‘flesh’)
• The *only-begotten son of Elohim – Jn 3:16, 18; 1Jn 4:9;
• The only-begotten son [of Father (Elohim)] – Jn 1:18;
• Elohim’s beloved son – Mt 3:17 //Mk 1:11; Heb 1:5 (at his baptism); Lk 1:32, 35
(at his conception/birth)
• the son of Elohim – Jn 3:17;
• 'my Son, I have begotten' – Act 13:33; Heb 1:5; 5:5;
• The son of Elohim (not ‘God the Son’)
• ‘Son of David’ (- Mashiah); son of Yosef; born of a woman, Mariam.
• He is not Yahweh; He is a representation of YHWH.
• The crucified and risen Master (> 'the risen Lord'’);
• Ascended to the Heaven (Mk 16:19; Lk 24:50; Act 1:9; 1Jn 2:1; Heb 10:12; 1Pe
3:22); exalted by Father (Phi 2:9);
www.christianitytoday.com/edstetzer/2013/august/why-ascension-matters.html

‘Who I am?’ ‘I am who I am’ – The recurrent theme in the Gospels which Yeshua challenged
people with. The anointed one of Elohim (Mashiah as King, Prophet, and Kohen) is the
answer, explicit or implicit. – E.g.
Mt 16:16; ['you are the Mashiah; the son of Elohim, the Living One']; //Mk 8:29 ['you are
the Mashiah']; //Lk 9:20. Mk 14:61-62 ['you are the Mashiah; the Son of the Blessed One'];
//Lk 22:70 ['you are the Mashiah; the son of Elohim']=
Jn 4:26 ['I, I am the one'];
Jn 8:58 ['I, I am who I am']
Jn 17:3 ['the one sent by Elohim']; Jn 8:28 ['the son-of-man'],

a
www.firstnewtestament.com/jewish_messiah_pagan_godman.htm
239
To know and follow Yeshua of the Gospels (a historical and biblical person) as not same
as to believe (or believe in) Jesus of religion – a person of various theological
formulations. Those who follow Yeshua of the Gospels are not same as those who believe
Jesus – so-called Christians [original epithet for the Gentile converts.]

A starting point to come to know His is a Galilean, an iterant rabbi – a Semite (ethnically
speaking. Cf. ‘Semite’ in English with different nuance). It refers to all the descendants of
Shem (one the Noah’s sons), such as the Akkadians, Arameans, Assyrians, Chaldeans,
Hebrews and Arabs. [Ref. Rocco A. Errico <Jesus: The Aramaic-Speaking Semite> in p.
141ff Tim Leedom (1993, 2003), The Book Your Church Doesn’t Want You to Read]

240
‘Jesus Christ’ – theological issues: [adopted from TOC in RC Sproul (1992), Essential
Truths of The Christian Faith]:
• The "Deity of Christ"@ [? 'his divinity] vs. divineness – raised, ascended, exalted –
Lordship]]
• The Subordination of Christ
• The Humanity of Christ
• The Sinlessness of Christ
• *Virgin Birth [unbiblical church belief, essential to Trinitarian doctrine – myth –
fiction, faith, or fact]
• Jesus Christ as the Only Begotten
• The Baptism of Christ
• The Glory of Christ
• The Ascension of Christ$
• Jesus Christ as Mediator
• The Threefold Office of Christ
• The Titles of Jesus
@ (*Deity - Jesus is God, a God or God-man? Which Jesus? Before birth? After death? How and
when he is made to become 'God'? What God? Which God? Whose God?) – not to be confused
with the biblical concept of *divinity of the man Yeshua Mashiah (1Ti 2:5) is not about ‘divinity
of God’, which is oxymoron. It centers on his being the only-begotten son of Elohim – exalted (Phi
2:9) to the right of Elohim (Mt 26:64 = Mk 14:46; Mk 16:19; Lk 22:69; Act 2:33; 5:31; 7:55, 57;
Rm 8:34; Eph 1:20; Col 3:1; Heb 1:3; 8:1; 10:12; 1Pe 3:22) – – Exalting God as God does not
make any sense. It is not about ‘divinity of God’, which is oxymoron as God is the divine
by definition. The divine is ascribed to God but also not God-being, though the word ‘God’
can be ascribed to other than the God, Elohim of the Scripture – e.g. ‘Caesar is God’, etc.
Someone is being called ‘God’ (i.e. as a title) is not same as someone is being ‘God’ (i.e.
the ontological reality). The exalted Mashiah is the divine Mashiah, it is not because he is
God as unbiblically claimed, but the exalted servant of Elohim, because he is the true
(trustworthy) Mashiah, the risen and exalted Lord, in the Kingdom reign of Elohim over
the new creation (for the old creation in His work of reconciliation) in life eternal, far
surpassing the life of the Davidic royal Mashiah. [Nor as Gnostic Cosmic Christ, nor
Christ peddled in Churches.]

Cf. Heb 1:2 He made the world-orders ░░ (poieō S4160 'make'; aiōn S165 ‘age – a period of time’); /made
the systems of things – NWT; /xxx: made the universe – NIV, HCSB; /> made the worlds – KJV; /xx: made
the world – NASB; /xxx: created the world – ESV; /x: did make ages – YLT; [Yeshua is the creator of the
new creation, not of the Genesis creation (in Gen 1:1 the heavens and the earth).]
[//Col 1:15 "all things in the heavens and on the earth were created anew'.]

This is God confusion at the word level – linguistic and literary, not religious and
theological. Arguments about ‘divine nature’ (e.g. “Jesus is a divine person but not a
human person but only a human being) is simply a theological play thing for Trinitarians
(e.g. homoousios vs. homoiousios vs. heteroousia; hypostasis; essence, attributes,
substance, etc.) not relevant to the life of God-believing people.
$ Most Christians can explain why the death and resurrection of Yeshua (Rm 8:34) are
necessary for sinners to be made righteous. Fewer can explain why His ascension is
important, and even fewer, why Yeshua’s continual intercession is essential for our
'salvation'. (Heb 7:25; 9:24; Jn 17)

241
242
 ‘the God’, ‘*God’, ‘a God’, ‘a god’; *divine; *divinity, divineness, *deity, divine being,
God/god/gods; god-being; godhead; ‘what God is’; ‘theosis’; ‘’deification’a *divine nature

- all the theological and religious jargons galore!

Elohim, * God, God-being, ‘what God is’, god. [pl. gods, god-beings]

Note: the word ‘god’ is less confusing if taken as its basic sense ‘a god-being’ –
someone (something) like a god, i.e. a mighty one.

‘God of the Bible – a God who speaks’ https://reformedforum.org/scripture-speech-god/

Metaphysics of God. Olson (2017), Essence of Christian Thought.

Reading material: www.forananswer.org/Colossians/Col2_9.htm

‘divine essence’, ‘divine nature’ (2Pe 1:4), ‘divine attributes’, etc. – what does it mean?

Definition of divine – of, from, like God or a god. ‘the state or quality of being divine’;
metonymically ‘god’ ‘deity’.
Definition of divinity – ‘the state or quality of being divine’; metonymically ‘god’ ‘deity’. Same
as ‘being God’?
Definition of deity – the lank or essential nature of a god; syn. god-being; god.

God as ‘A Being’ or ‘Being itself’? ‘the Being’? (what capitalization makes)? In what sense?
What make God God – ‘supreme’? ‘omnipotent’? ‘omniscient’? self-existing, unconditioned?
uncreated, creator. The Absolute? (what does it mean by absolute?) God is, or believed to be so?
‘controlling, not controlled’. (not necessarily benevolent but believed to be? God as ‘a personal
being’ vs. ‘Being Itself’? What does it mean by ‘personal’? belonging to the notion of ‘person’?
What is person? Same as ‘Person’ in Trinity formula?
www.patheos.com/blogs/rogereolson/2015/05/is-god-a-being-or-being-itself/
Cherbonnier “Biblical Metaphysic and Christian Philosophy” (Theology Today 9:3 [October,
1952]: 360-375) and “Is There A Biblical Metaphysic?” (Theology Today 15:4 [January, 1959]:
454-469).

‘deity of Jesus’? Being a deity (a God)? Or ‘divinity of Jesus’ – what makes him to be ‘the only-
begotten Son of God’?

theotēs (Col 2:9 fullness of [the state of] God-being plērōma tēs theotētos), theoitēs (Rm 1:20);
theios (Act 17:29); ho theos (‘the God’, i.e. Elohim, the God of the Scripture), theos (Jn 1:1c); el;
elohim.

[Quote: ‘No. But if there was one thing I learned in the army it was to be positive -- especially
when you don't know what you're talking about.’ – in the mouth of Major General Waverly in the
movie ‘White Christmas’ (1954). Might worth to change ‘people learned in the seminary, from
the pulpit, from the books, etc.]

a
Christensen and Wittung (2007), Partakers of the Divine Nature – The History and Development of
Deification in the Christian Traditions http://assets.bakerpublishinggroup.com/processed/book-
resources/files/Excerpt_Christiansen_Partakers.pdf?1362587948
243
 2Pe 1:4 a divine nature ░░ \theias ~phuseōs; / [cf. v. 3 tēs theias dunameōs autos the
divine power of Him] [not alluding to that as of spirit – Jn 4:24]; /x: the very nature of God –
Cass; / /x: the very nature of God – Cass; / [not in reference to the kind of body, or the plane of
existence, but is in reference to godlike qualities as opposed to the corruption that is the
world. In other words, here “divine nature” is in reference to what man should possess as
opposed to the sinful nature that man now possesses…. Despite the meanings that may have
been given to the word “divine” and “deity”, scripturally, the words “divine” and “deity”
have to relate to forms of the Hebrew word often transliterated as “el” and forms of the
corresponding Greek word transliterated as “theos”. Defining “divine” and “deity” along
the lines of the Hebraic usage of these words does allow us to say that Jesus is “divine” and
Jesus is “deity”, although Jesus is not God Most-High. Not only this, one could define many
humans as divine, possessing special mightiness or authority. http://jesus-
rlbible.com/?p=6564 ‘divine nature’ = http://life-rlbible.com/?p=1279] [not ‘the nature of
Elohim’] [Cf. ho theios; Act 17:29 ‘deity’ ‘*godhead’]
.

Jesus – ‘divine person but not human person’? ‘Yeshua where divinity meets humanity’ [Ref:
Israel Wayne (2015), Questions Jesus Asks: Where Divinity Meets Humanity] Cf. ‘When
divinity meets humanity’]
[Ref: http://jesus-rlbible.com/?p=1379 Was Jesus Divine as a Human?]

The core of the Biblical teach is not about ‘God’ who exists as the concept of the Greek
‘Being’ ‘Absolute’ which does not require ‘love’. Nor it is about Man or Savior. It is about
how the divinity (divine reality) meats humanity in Yeshua, the very human person (not
docetic God-man), nor as a divine person, which can be human being labelled

244
Yeshua – the historical person

Yeshua the Nazarene

*Nazarene

The expression ‘Yeshua the Nazarene’ (‘Jesus from Nazareth’) may be preferred to Yeshua
Messiah when the historical person is in focus, being believed as the Mashiah promised to
come – the man the Gospels records. In either case, ‘Jesus’ or ‘Jesus Christ’ (as used in the
English and in the language of Church and religion) is alien and foreign to the Scripture.
[Gk. Nazarēnos (‘Nazarene’ in Mk, Lk) with a variant Nazōraios (‘Nazorean’ (in Mt, Mk, Lk,
Jn, Acts). The Greek New Testament uses "Nazarene" six times, while "Nazorean" is used 13
times.]
[Cf. Netzarim. Notzarim Nazarene (sect), (a sect of 4th century Christianity described by
Epiphanius) Nazirite,
Nazorene Mt 2:23 (/Nazarene – KJV, most; /x: Nazarite – Bishops, Geneva)
the Nazarene, Yeshua Mk 14:67
Yeshua the Nazarene Mt 26:71; Mk 16:6
Yeshua Nazarene Mk 1:24; Lk 4:34;
Yeshua the Nazarene {/Nazorene} Mk 10:47; Lk 24:19; Act 3:6
Yeshua the Nazorene Lk 18:37; Jn 18:5, 7; 19:19; Act 2:22; 6:14; 22:8; 26:9
the name of Yeshua Mashiah the Nazorene Act 4:10

Yeshua the son of Yosef, the one from Nazareth – Jn 1:15

Yeshua the one from Nazareth –Mt 21:11; Act 10:38

www.hebrew4christians.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=151&t=2932
1. people from Nazareth;
2. Nazarene (sect), (‘sect of the Nazarenes’ Act 24:5) (1st century CE)
Cf. a 4th century CE Jewish Yeshua movement similar to the Ebionites.

245
Birth of Yeshua

When was Yeshua born?

Mt 2:1– "[Sometime] after Yeshua was born in Bethlehem …"

Bethlehem ░░ [About 6 miles S. of Yerusalem. King David’s hometown.]; [G-Mt does not record how
Yeshua’s family came to be in Bethlehem sometime after he was born.] [Cf. another Bethlehem in Zebulun
(Galilee)];
Judea ░░ = Judea proper. [Cf. Judea the Roman Province incorporated Judea proper, Samaria, and Idumea,
but not Galilee, Gaulanitis, Perea, or Decapolis.]

www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-topics/new-testament/where-was-jesus-born/
Philip J. King (2014), Biblical Views: Jesus’ Birthplace and Jesus’ Home, BAR 40:06, Nov/Dec 2014
www.religioustolerance.org/xmaswwjb.htm

When was Yeshua born?

[See IRENT Vol. III - Supplement (Collections #5C - When was He born).]

• Yohanan, the Baptizer – born in 4 B.C. 12th lunar month.

• Born 3 B.C. [in the Passover season as a Passover lamb (Abib 1)]
• Flight to Egypt [Mt 2:13-15] [2 B.C. around December]
• Death of Herod [Mt 2:19] [1 B.C. before the Passover after the lunar eclipse (Jan).]
[*Christmas – annual celebration (holiday/festivity) for birth of Jesus from Roman Catholic tradition. [Not a
festival or commemoration. The traditional date on December 25 since Constantine Catholic Church which
was to take over the pagan Roman winter solstice festival, Saturnalia and Dies Natalis Solis Invici. The date
has nothing to do with actual birth day of Jesus (which was 3 B.C. in 6th lunar month – for the season of
Sukkot festival in Judaism). The first recorded date of Christmas being celebrated on December 25th was in
336, during the time of the Roman Emperor Constantine (he was the first Christian Roman Emperor). A few
years later, Pope Julius I officially declared that the birth of Jesus would be celebrated on the 25th December.
www.whychristmas.com/customs/25th.shtml.
[Jan. 9 for Eastern Orthodox Church, which is the day for "Epiphany" in Catholic.] [The Old English word as
Crīstesmæsse was first recorded in 1038 CE.]
[See a zip file for 'Star of Bethlehem' in IRENT Vol. III - Supplement (Collections #4)];

246
‘*Virgin birth of Jesus’ – fiction, faith, or fact – myth, belief, and doctrine –
[See in Walk through the Scripture 3C - People and Persons]

The term 'virgin birth' of a stock formula of the Church is often ambiguous; the term 'virginal
conception' is a preferred technical term for Mary's virginitas ante partum.

The proof texts which were used fomenting pagan idea from early Constantine Roman
Christianism are only in two places. Which are read, interpreted and translated against plain
statements in the New Testament throughout that Yosef was father of Yeshua that he comes from
the seed of David to be the promised Mashiah, which the idea of his virgin birth totally negates.

[Virgin birth of Jesus is the back bone of a man-made Greco--Roman 'God Jesus' religion -
nothing to do with the true biblical Apostolic Christianity.]

Mt 1:18 "…before they got there (after

marriage), it came to light that she [Mariam]
was holding in her womb from [the power of]
holy spirit";
Mt 1:20 " …what has been brought forth in her
is from [the power of] holy spirit.
Mt 1:23– 'the maiden shall have in her womb
and bring forth a son
and they shall call him Immanuel' [OT quote]
Lk 1:31 "… You're going to conceive in your
womb and will give birth to a son" will conceive
in your womb"
1:32 "…Adonai Elohim will give to him the
throne of David, his forefather.
Lk 1:34 "…How will all this be [accomplished]
as I know not a man"
Lk 1:35 "The holy spirit will come upon you,
and the power of the Most High will cover over
you; therefore, indeed, the holy one to be
begotten in you shall be called God's Son."
Mammalian parthenogenesis is never documented. It is theoretically possible but the result
would be a female, not a male. Claim that someone name Ron Wyatt found blood of Jesus
with only one pair of chromosomes (haploid) as for a proof of virgin birth is a hoax by a
homo ignoramus par excellence
'from holy spirit' does not mean or
Holy Ghost impregnated her; a god
was put into her womb.
OT has alma 'a young maiden of
marriageable age.
LXX has it 'parthenos' which it
translates Hebrew words alma as well
as bethula ('pure virgin')
Immanuel – the presence of Elohim in
the person of Yeshua; not a God was
put into the womb to come out as god-
man or demigod.
She is going to. She is not yet
pregnant.
Yeshua is the son of Yosef to be from
the seed of David.
She was not saying "How this can be,
since I a virgin", asking how is it
possible for her to be pregnant without
having had sexual relation with her
husband.
How will be a Mashiah born from her,
as I have yet to know my husband?
Holy one – not god-man or demigod.
The one to be soon begotten
[conceived] as the son of Yosef, not to
be soon born as a fatherless son.

247
 Nicene Creed of 325 CE
[underlined bracketed is in the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed (381 CE)]

Πιστεύομεν εἰς ἕνα Κύριον Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν, Believe in one Lord Jesus Christ
… κατελθόντα [ἐκ τῶν οὐρανῶν] came [from the heaven]
καὶ σαρκωθέντα and incarnated
[ἐκ Πνεύματος Ἁγίου καὶ Μαρίας τῆς Παρθένου] [by holy spirt and Mary the virgin]
καὶ ἐνανθρωπήσαντα. and became man.

Apostles' Creed (ca 390 CE)

…, τòν συλληφθέντα ἐκ πνεύματος ἁγίου, the one conceived by holy spirit

γεννηθέντα ἐκ Μαρίας τῆς παρθένου, born of Mary the virgin.

"Born of a virgin (Catholic tradition)", not 'born of a woman (Gal 4:4)'?

Yeshua was not born of a virgin without a father (‘virgin birth’ or more precisely, ‘virginal
conception’, that is, without the intervention of human seed), but born of physical union
of Yosef and Mariam, his mother. He takes on human nature as any human being. The
Mashiah is to be from the seed of David (Jn 7:42; Act 13:22-23; Rm 1:3; 2Tim 2:8. Cf. Act 2:30;
Cf. Jer 22:30) ← from seed of Abraham (Jn 8:33, 37; Rm 9:7; 11:1; Gal 3:29; Heb 2:16;). At
the level of spirit, he is God’s son, the son of Elohim. [> ‘Son of God’; See Mt 1:18-19;
Lk 1:26-27, 31; 34-37 in IRENT] – "fable, fiction, or fact?" – a single verse is misread
and misinterpreted for eisegesis – Lk 1:34 ('as I know not a man', but not 'I will not come
to know a man') – having conflated with only a handful verses Mt 1:20, 23. Conception
by power of holy spirit (Mt 1:20; Lk 1:35 → v. 39 after Gabriel's announcement, not
before) is blindly read as God or God the Holy Ghost impregnating Mariam (putting
something like 'the Word' into her womb to infuse non-human Y-chromosome?) which
would bring out a demi-god or god-man, not a true human being or human person! [Note:
Mariam is not in the line of David from the Tribe of Yudah, her being relative of Elisheba,
wife of the priest Zekharyah, from the Tribe of Levi. Lk 1:36]

[Ref: Andrew Lincoln (2013), Born of a Virgin? -- Reconceiving Jesus in the Bible, Tradition, and
Theology]

*Virgin (parthenos S3933) – LXX used to translate Hebrew words, both almah (H5959 young maiden – Isa
7:14 quoted in Mt 1:23) and bethulah (H1330 virgin)

Not based on the Bible but on church pesher – (Mt 1:18-25; Lk 1:26; 2:1-21,) [ignores Mt 1:16, and other
texts for Yosef being the father of him and his siblings. (Gal 4:4 'born of a woman').] It has become part and
parcel of the church doctrine of Trinity along with 'God incarnate doctrine' (replacing 'Logos incarnate of Jn
1:14).

1Jn 4:2 Every spirit of man that acknowledges Yeshua Mashiah

having come in flesh,a [=2Jn 7; Jn 1:14; cf. 1Jn 2:18, 22; 5:1]
+
they are the ones from Elohim;

a1Jn 4:2, 3v.l. in flesh ░░ ['flesh-and-blood' = ‘as a true human being, human person’. Refutes Docetism and the idea
of Yeshua being a demigod or god-man (virgin birth; virginal conception without having a human father).]
248
Varied teachings of Catholic Mariology:

• the Virgin Mary

• 'Blessed Virgin'; 'Most Holy Virgin';
• natus ex Maria virgine ('born of Virgin Mary').
• ‘virgin birth’ → virginal conception (virginitas ante partum) with no intervention
of human seed. [i.e. Christ (of Church) is name only with nothing to do with the
Mashiah of the Scripture, the anointed one by YHWH Elohim to be His only-
begotten Son, who had to be from the seed of David).
• 'virginal parturition' virginatus in partu (– she remained a virgin even through the
Jesus' birth (i.e., birthing was miraculous, or caused no rupture of the hymen or
other bodily lesions; with no labor pain)
• 'perpetual virginity' virginatus perpetuo post partum with no sexual relation with
her husband until her death. 'ever virgin' (semper virgo, aeiparthenos)
• ‘Immaculate Conception’
• 'Co-redemptrix', 'Queen of Heaven' – a Catholic goddess?

Joseph Fitzmyer, "The virginal conception of Jesus in the New Testament"

https://doi.org/10.1177/004056397303400401

249
‘genealogy of Jesus’

Yosef (from Davidic line) married Mariam, a maiden virgin, (from the line of Aaron). Yeshua was born as
their first son; his brothers and sisters were their children, not Yosef's step children. Yosef was his
biological father [contra 'virgin birth' belief, which became essential for the Trinity doctrine.] 'Virgin Mary'
is a fixed phrase of church language [cf. Jn 6:42 "…Yeshua, the son of Yosef …"]

Yosef, the husband of Mariam:

• Mt 1:2-17 lineage for Abraham’s Son; for David’s Son - Solomon; to Yosef.
• Lk 3:23-38 lineage from Yosef (in levirate marriage) – Nathan – David – Adam.

A note on his genealogy text of G-Mt & G-Lk:

(1) Presence of the special five women (4 named) in the list of G-Mt changes the character of a
genealogy in an unexpected way [- normally the women would not be included in the family genealogy];
(2) Not traced down through the Davidic royal line:
(a) Yechonyiah – (Mt 1:11-12);
(b) David – Nathan (Lk 3:31) Cf. David – Solomon (Mt 1:6);
(3) Mariam was from the tribe of Levi, not of Yudah (Lk 1:5, 36 Elisheba being a relative of Mariam, the
wife of Yosef).
(4) Claim that Lukan genealogy has to be of Mary, not Yosef, is an attempt to support of the church
doctrine of 'virgin birth of Jesus'

Brother and sisters of Yeshua

They are children of Yosef and Mariam. Those who entertain the so-called virgin birth myth try to distort
the biblical texts by claiming that they were children of Yosef from his previous marriage, or they were
adopted children!!
Mt 12:46 'his mother and his brothers are standing outside']
Mt 13:55-56 'his brothers Yaakob and Yosef and Shimon and Yehuda and all his sisters']

Death of Yeshua

• When: CE 30, Abib 14 (Passover day – Full moon)

• Where: Golgotha – in the Mount Olive, not traditional places of tourists' spots, such
as Church of the Holy Sepulcher, Garden Tomb and Gordon's Calvary.
[See the zip file "Location of Golgotha -collections.zip" in IRENT Vol. III -
Supplement (Collections #5C – When was He born)];

250
Yehoshua
Yehoshua the common theophoric Hebrew name (‘Yah is salvation’ H3091) (> Jehoshua’. e.g. the
name of an Ephramite who succeeded Moses and led the Israelites into the Promised Land. [Num
13:8; 16; Deu 34:9; Jos 1:1, 2; the son of Nun (Num 13:16)] [= Joshua (e.g. Jos 1:1; Exo 17:9 etc.)
[= Act 7:45 = Heb 4:8 Gk. is same as for Yeshua/Jesus, causing mistranslation as 'Jesus'. He is a
different person from Lk 3:29] [Yah – a short form of YHWH].
H3444 yeshuah ‫ יהושע י ְהֹושֻׁ ע‬e.g. Exo 14:12; Psa 98:2, Isa 49:6 (YHWH is salvation); Exo 15:2
(salvation from Yah). Cf. H3467 yasha – 'to save, deliver'.
• H3091Yehoshua (218x) 'Yehuashua' /> Jehoshua; />> Joshua; Exo 17:9; Num 11:28; Deu 1:38;
Jos 1:1; Judg 1:1, etc.

• H3442 ‫ י ֵׁשּוע‬Yeshua (29x) (in Hebrew, also in Aramaic) (pronounced with 'shua' accented) 1Ch
24:11; 2Ch 31:15; Ezr 2:2; Neh 3:19; 8:17, etc. Joshua – NET, NWT; /x: Jeshua – KJV, ESV,
ASV; /Iosua – Bishops]
• [?H3443 Yeshua (1x) Ezr 3:2 – why a separate Strong #?]
• [Cf. H3444 yeshuah (77x) 'salvation' 'deliverance' Gen 49:19] [/Joshua – NET, NWT; /x: Jeshua
– KJV, ESV, ASV; /Iosua – Bishops;]

This was the name of at least five different persons and one village in the southern part of Yehudah
("Judah") in use among the population of the Land of Israel at the time of the Second Temple. The
name Yeshua was one of the most common male names in that period, tied with Eleazer for fifth
place behind Shimon (> Simon), Yosef (> Joseph) Yehudah (>Judah), and Yohanan (> John). Nearly
one out of ten persons known from the period was named Yeshua. (a short form of * Yehoshua).

*Christ; *Mashiah; *Messiah; the *Anointed one.

Yeshua came to be believed to be the promised Mashiah. ‘Yeshua Mashiah’ in the Bible is not ‘Jesus
Christ’ of Christian religions; nor ‘'Jesus became Christ'. [Cf. the title of the book by Peter De Rosa
(1974), Jesus who became Christ.

ho Christos; Christos; a messiah; messiahs; the Messiah. Never in the sense of 'Christ of Church'. In the
NT Yeshua was believed by the followers to be the promised Mashiah who had come. Like the English
word 'Jesus', the English word 'Christ' fail to carry the biblical figure of the promised Mashiah, anointed
by Elohim for king, priest, and prophet; but rather they have such different word picture, association,
and connotation [of religiosity] which goes against what the Scripture presents. For this reason, IRENT
does not use 'Jesus' and 'Christ' as translation words for 'Yeshua' and 'Mashiah'.
This very common and important Gk. is used in two distinct usages throughout the NT, as stand-alone
or in combination of 'Yeshua Mashiah' or 'Mashiah Yeshua'; in the latter it is a title for Yeshua, as their
followers used,

IRENT translates ‘ho Christos’– mostly as 'the Mashiah' with 9 places as 'the anointed one'
(1) Mt 16:16; 23:10; 26:68; Mk 8:29; Lk 9:20; Jn 1:41a; 4:25; Act 3:18; (the Messiah – NIV,
HCSB, ISV, TEV; /the Christ – KJV, NASB, ESV, NET);
(2) Act 4:26 (his anointed one – NIV, (ESV); /His Messiah – TEV. HCSB, ISV); /anointed one –
NWT; /Anointed – ESV; /xx: Christ – KJV, NET, and many; /> Messiah – JNT, ISV, CEV, ERV,
GNB
(1) 'the anointed one' as a king, prophet, and priest – e.g. King David.

251
 (2) 'the promised Mashiah' – It is in this sense of the Mashiah promised to come for Israel that the
phrase is used in the Gospels; but never as in the sense of 'Christ of Church'. Especially, Mk 12:35
//Mt 22:41 //Lk 20:41 - 'the promised Mashiah is the son of David'.
Cf. 'the so-called Mashiah' (e.g. ho legomenos Christos 'the one who is called Mashiah' Mt 1:16;
27:17, 22).
Anarthrous Christos as His title for Yeshua given by his followers – Lk 2:11; Mt 1:16; (cf. vocative Mt
26:68; genitive Mk 9:41). In the Epistles, it is used to refer to Yeshua Mashiah and functions as the
designator of him, unwittingly as his second name (‘last name’).

Problem of the proof of his Messiahship; ‘Messianic Prophecies’; '*virgin birth'

NT texts quoting OT – problem of translation (from Hebrew to LXX to GNT); problem of midrash/pesher
by NT writers themselves;

Problem of Christian midrash of NT texts tying with OT allusions as OT itself does not give prophecies on
the person Yeshua the Nazarene is ‘the Mashiah’, not even ‘a Mashiah’, to come.

So-called Messianic prophecies in OT may be considered as such. However, they are not the proof of the
Messiahship of Yeshua the Nazarene. It is Christian midrash (interpretation for their a priori conviction).
Allusion and similarity may be seen in Yeshua, but often forced themselves to see that way. What is considered
as the Messianic prophecies in NT may not actually be prophecies in the proper sense, nor historical
predictions, in the OT context but are honestly to be considered as NT midrash.

What proves that someone is the Mashiah? The answer is not easy as it is not logically possible to prove
the Mashiah = Jesus from whatever prediction or prophecy is manipulated. Rather to a question ‘who
cannot be the Mashiah’, an easy answer can be given:
Jesus of Christian religions, coming with many 'faces', who is ‘believed’ to be a virgin born (e.g. in
the Apostolic Creed) cannot be the Mashiah, the one who is promised to come in the line of David
as the Son of David. If no father, he cannot be a man as he is believed to be a god-man (god walking
on earth disguising as a human) contrary to the NT statement that it was a man Jesus for the mediator
of God and man. Note: Genealogy in Lk 3:23-38 is not of Mary. The ‘seed’ that comes down is not
of a woman. The Scripture says He was born a man (not demigod or God-man), to be a human being
and human person with human nature, i.e. 'according to flesh' (Gal 4:29); 'of a woman' (Gal 4:4, not
of a virgin); takes on divine character (not 'divine nature') as the only-begotten son of Elohim.

So-called ‘Messianic Secret in G-Mark’

Quoted from p. 5 Morna Hooker (1974), The Johannine Prologue and the Messianic Secret
http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0028688500008766

To read Mark's gospel after reading the Prologue is to read with the spectacles of faith: the
messianic secret is an open secret for those who have been allowed to overhear the words
from heaven, for to them the significance of what is happening is obvious, and the obtuseness
of crowds, disciples and religious leaders who failed to comprehend seems culpable. Mark
demonstrates the truth that the 'facts' alone are insufficient: those with eyes of faith interpret
what is happening correctly - others deny Jesus' authority or attribute it to the wrong source.
Men and women are divided in Mark's narrative into those who acknowledge Jesus and those
who reject him - and to acknowledge him is to confess that he is the Christ, the Son of God,
and to recognize the Spirit of God at work in him. The faith to which the disciples are called
- together with the readers of the gospel - is precisely that which is revealed to us in the
opening verses: and it is precisely this estimate of Jesus which divides disciple from
unbeliever, for those who do not see and understand the divine revelation are those who
remain outside, and who are offended by what Jesus does.
252
 The messianic secret in Mark was once interpreted as something which divided believer from
unbeliever during the ministry of Jesus. Later, it was seen as representing the tension between
the non-messianic ministry of Jesus and the messianic interpretation of the Church - between
'then' and 'now'. Whether or not there is some truth in either or both of these positions, it is
certainly true that the messianic secret in Mark indicates a tension in the present experience
of the evangelist and his readers: their generation is divided into those who have eyes to see
and those who have not. The problem is not simply that men and women failed to recognize
then the one whom they now acknowledge to be Messiah; but that the question ' Who is he?'
can still be given totally opposing answers. … When we turn to John we have, of course, no
'messianic secret'. …

“Yeshua Mashiah” (᾿Ιησοῦς Χριστός) (>> Jesus Christ) in the NT:

In Mt 1:1 and 1:18 v.l. (instead of simply ‘IHSOUS’ here).

In Mark only once - in 1:1, and none in Luke.
John has it twice (Jn 1:17; 17:3), prob. in the editorial voice.
It is in Paul’s writings that both “Yeshua Mashiah” and “Mashiah Yeshua” are shown. (80x).

From G-Mk EE:

Mashiah: />Messiah >; /x: Christ; [from Hebrew Mashiah; ‘Christ’ from Greek Christos. Latin - Christus]
[Here YHWH’s anointed One, that is, the One who has God′s priestly and kingly authority bestowed on.]
[meaning both ‘anointed’ (mashuach), as well as ‘anointer’ (moshiach). The one anointed is, in succession,
in a position to anoint others. In the Scripture, the word ‘Messiah’ is applied only for Kohen haGadol (>
High Priest) and the Mashiah (Yeshua). Cf. www.messiahalive.net/ Joseph Viel] [All the occurrences of
this word (except Mt 1:1 and Mk 1:1, and possible in 1:18) should be correctly rendered as ‘Mashiah’
rather than ‘Christ’, since the latter now is used equivalent to His full name (as ‘Jesus Christ’ vs. Yeshua
Mashiah).]

Christos is related to the Greek verb chriō meaning “to anoint,” and was the word used by
the LXX to translate ‫( ָמשִׁיח‬mashiach), “one who was anointed for a special task.” The
English “Messiah” is an anglicized form of “mashiach.” Like many titles,
“Mashiah/Christ” became a sort of proper name, and we find this occurring in the
Apostolic writings (cf. Rm 1:1; Gal 1:1; James 2:1; Rev 22:21). Yet it never lost its
connection to the whole prophetic idea of “Mashiah” as a title, the One promised from of
old who would come to restore the fortunes of Yisrael, and to bring in the final redemption.
Clearly, Matthew has this messianic thought in mind by his use of Christos (2:4; 16:16,
20; 22:42; 24:5, 23; 26:63, 68).
[He must be descended from the tribe of Judah (Gen 49:10) as King David was (1Sam 17:12; 1Chr 28:4)
and descended from King David himself (2Sam 7:12-13; Isa 9:6-7; Jer 23:5-6).]

[History of ‘J’ letter/sound in English]

[Heb: ‘Yeshua’ (← Yehoshua ‘Yah is salvation’) (a very common name); ‘Yashua’ (meaning
‘Yahweh saves’); ‘Yeshu’ (from change by the Jewish authorities. Used by modern Israelis); [Gk.
IESOUS] [Latin = Iesus] (Ko. 예수; other vernacular – Jesus, Yesu, Isu, etc.)

Pss of Solomon 17:32 And he (shall be) a righteous king, taught of God, over them; and
there shall be no unrighteousness in his days in their midst, For all shall be holy and their

253
 king the anointed of the Lord.
The Mashiah is a son of David (in opposition to the Maccabean priest-kings and the Levitical
Mashiah), man without supernatural power, raised up by God to purge Jerusalem and to reign
in peace over all nations. The description of him is taken largely from the Prophets and the
Psalter. He is called in the text (xvii. 36) "the lord Mashiah," or "anointed one, lord" (χριστὺς
κύριος), which is perhaps a clerical error for "the anointed of the Lord," the common
expression. This conception of his character, destined to be permanent, is a return, natural
under the circumstances, to the Old Testament representation (See Messiah).
Ref: Grant R. Jeffrey “Jesus – The Great Debate” [1999 Word Publishing]
p. 224-227 Is the Original Hebrew Name of Jesus, Yeshua or Yeshu?
- Yeshua, name itself (1) Neh 8:17 as contracted form of Yehoshua [Neh 8:17]. (2) DSS 4QT
Testimonium (3) first century ossuary (Archeologist EL Sukenik 1931; Charles Clermont-Ganneau
1874); Yeshua as direct reference to J.C. – in Mishnah Torah – The Laws of Kings and Their Wars,
Ch. II, 234-235. “Yeshua of Nazareth who aspired to be the Mashiah and was executed by the court
was also [alluded to] in Daniel’s prophecies …”

?? The name “Yeshua” (see above p. 17) is formed on the Hebrew verb
‫ישע‬
ָ , yasha‘, “to deliver, save” and akin to the noun ‫ ישְּׁועָה‬, y’shu’ah, “? salvation.”

The name therefore carries the primary purpose of Yeshua: “to save the people of Elohim
from their sins.” The deliverance He will bring will be a salvation first and foremost from
the condemnation that sin brings. This forensic aspect of salvation is not devoid of physical
deliverance, but the one encompasses the other.

It is related to the Hebrew name ‫( יהֵֹושֻע‬also spelled fully: ‫יהֵֹושּוע‬, Yehoshu’a), which was
shortened to ‫( יֹושּוע‬Yoshu’a) and then to ‫( ישֵּוע‬Yeshua).

Studies have shown that the even shorter pronunciation, ‫( ישֵּוע‬Yeshu, in which the final
furtive patach has been dropped), was a dialectical phenomenon in the northern Galil, and
not, as many have supposed, a deliberate slur on His name by later rabbinic writers (who
rejected His claims to be their Mashiah and the Son of God – AJR). Some have suggested
that Yeshu is a deliberate acronym for “May his name and memory be blotted out” ( ‫שְׁמֹו ימִׁ ח‬
‫ ?( )וזְׁכִׁ רֹו‬Yimach Shemo Uzikhro?) but though such an acronym was used in later times, it
was not the reason for this shortened pronunciation. This was the Galilean pronunciation, as
Flusser and others have shown. In fact, the Greek Iēsous (with final “s” denoting a
nominative case) may itself explain the regular use of ‫( ישֵּו‬Yeshu) in the later rabbinic
materials, as an assimilation to the Greek Iēsous.

Yeshua was a common name in the 1st Century. Three of the 72 who translated the LXX had the
name, and Josephus lists 20 persons by this name in his writings. The name is found in inscriptions
and burial texts. A pre-exilic example is found in Luke’s genealogy (Lk 3:29), and in Mt 27:16, one
manuscript has Barabbas called “Iesous Barabbas.” In Acts 13:6 the sorcerer in Cyprus is called Bar-
Iesous, and in Col 4:11, Paul’s helper is “Iesous who is called Ioustos.” No doubt under the influence
of the emerging Christian Church, by the 2nd Century, the name Iesous disappears as a proper name.
According to Jastrow, the full name ‫( ישֵּוע‬Yeshua) is found only in reference to the ninth order of the
priestly courses found in 1Chr 24:7–18.
1:1 Messiah░░ /Christ – most; [Anglicized form of Hebrew word (Mashiach). English word ‘Christ’ is
from transliteration of Greek ‘Christos’ meaning ‘anointed’ with nuance of ‘specially chosen’; See
Supplement-Glossary-Person for ‘Christ; Messiah; Anointed’] (in Hebrew transliterate); /Mashiach –
Heb; /Christ (in English); [i.e. meaning both ‘anointed’ (mashuach), as well as ‘anointer’ (moshiach).
‘Messiah’ is used only for High Priest and the Messiah (Yeshua). - www.messiahalive.net/ Joseph Viel]
[Here Yahweh’s anointed One, that is, ‘given God′s priestly and kingly authority’.]
254
255
Other titles for Yeshua
Name, descriptives or titles for Yeshua – unbiblical or non-biblical.

• Jesus, instead of 'Yeshua'

• The Second Person of the Trinity (God)
• God the Son, instead of 'the Son of God'
• The heavenly Son of Man, instead of 'the Son of Man' (the Son-of-Man').
• Christ, instead of "Mashiah (Messiah)"
• Cosmic Christ
• 'God Incarnate', instead of 'Logos Incarnate'
• The eternal Logos
• The miracle worker.
• Virgin-born
• "God with us", instead of "Elohim is with us'"
• 'God' 'God-man' 'demigod' to be worshiped with prayer, instead of 'man'
• A deity, instead of a divine man (theios aner)

• Born on Christmas day, instead of born as a Passover lamb.

• Crucified after Passover, instead of 'crucified on the Passover day'.
• Mother, a God-bearer (theotokos), not a Mashiah-bearer (Christotokos).
• Father is God himself, instead of his being a 'seed of David'

*Son of God; *son of Elohim (= of the God); a son of God; God’s son; ‘*God the Son’

'Son' is son of a father. Son has beginning from father. Son with no beginning is nothing but a fictional
entity. God the Son who has no beginning is a doctrinal creation. Son is below Father; cannot be equal. He
may have same quality and character. Yeshua was born and existed because he is always in relation to
Elohim, who he called Father (as he showed how Elohim is as Father to us). He is not same as Elohim; he is
not Elohim (God). In the Hellenistic world after parting of the way from Yehudism, he has become the
objection of veneration and worship even 'as God', eventually as another 'God' (2nd Person of Trinity) who
had no beginning and who is equal to Elohim the Father in all aspect. Note: in the fixed phrase of ‘son of
Elohim’ or ‘God’s son’, the word ‘son’ is not capitalized in order to remove a wrong connotation of ‘God
the Son’, 2nd Person of the Trinity.

God is Father only means 'God is as Father'. The word Father is a figure of speech. He is Son of God only
means 'he is as Son of God'. God does not have 'sons', unless in the language of pagan gods.

“Son of God” – servant of God –

https://youtu.be/Yrp9TB8Sx9Y Proof in the Bible why Jesus is NOT God

What does it mean by ‘son of God’? What does it mean to say Yeshua is the Son of God?
Different from the son of Elohim? What does it mean by ‘son’? Without precise definitions of
words and terms and using them consistently, any argument is useless, as contradictory statements
cannot be disproved.
‘Son of God’ is a title, which in metaphoric, for his status, not for the ontological identity.

Gk. pais same word Aramaic for child or servant. [Cf. huios ‘son’]
Act 3:13, 26; His (God’s) servant
Act 4:27; 30 holy servant Yeshua
256
 Cf. ‘God the Son’ – a grievous unbiblical doctrinal church jargon (‘the Eternal Pre-existing Son’
‘Cosmic Christ’). “A metaphorical son of God” is escalated to a “metaphysical God the Son” a as the
Biblical teaching which is in Hebrew mindset has been overtaken by Greek mindset from the second
century CE. For the concept of ‘God’ the Hebrew Elohim (with the name YHWH) is covered out by the
name-less Greek theos (God-being) which is in English word of generic ‘God’. In common usage, ‘God
is God? Right? No. God is not God. God is any god. And, ‘God is NOT God’ (i.e. God we say is not
God others say; God when we say now is not God when we say at different occasions and senses). [In
the phrase ‘God the Son’ itself, the confusion on the meaning of the word ‘God’ is one of the major
cause of the heated doctrinal arguments among Christianism, exposing deficient linguistic, logical, and
literary understanding.]

The expression ‘son of God’ (‘son of God-being’) also needs careful examination. It was a common
pagan idea in Greco-Roman word where it was presumed that the son of God could be nothing less than
a god as well.
Ref. https://kazlandblog.wordpress.com/2016/05/16/does-son-of-god-mean-possesses-the-ontological-
nature-of-god/ The expression ‘son of (someone)’ as a Hebrew idiom = ‘(a person) possessing
character-trait/nature of (someone)’ ‘in capacity/function of’ – not ‘identical/same’ (ontological – e.g.
‘God’ or ‘God the Son’), but qualitative; a functional title. E.g. ‘son of David’ as for a royal Mashiah.

In OT the concept of ‘son of Elohim’ applies to many individuals and groups. In not one of the OT
passages were these persons considered divine.

A son of God → the son of God → the ‘only begotten’ Son of God (in NT) → then becomes unbiblical
‘God the Son’. When did Yeshua become the ‘son of Elohim’? (‘Elohim’ for Gk. ho theos ‘the God’)
– of gradual theological development:
• Heb 1:1, 3 at His Ascension
• Rm 1:3-4 at the Resurrection
• Act 13:32-33 at the Resurrection
• Mk 1:13 at His baptism – ‘You are my beloved son, in whom I am delighted’
• Mt 3:17 at His baptism – ‘This is My beloved son, in whom I am delighted’
• Lk 1:35 upon His birth – ‘therefore, the child to be born from you will be holy;
he will be call the ‘Son of God’.
• Trinitarian before He was born as the pre-exsiting, eternal, God the Son! – from
Trinitarian reading of Jn 1:1-14; 17:5. (‘Eternal sonship’ ‘Eternal Existence’ vs.
‘eternal generation of the Son’)
[Tovia Singer (2014, new expanded ed.), Let’s Get Biblical (Vol. 1) pp. 168-176.
www.OutreachJudaism.org ]
www.blueletterbible.org/faq/don_stewart/don_stewart_221.cfm
www.christiancourier.com/articles/1359-was-jesus-the-son-of-god-eternally

Vocab: The similar expressions have different sense, nuance, and connotation; need to be careful
attention for reading the Scripture and translating for the Bible.

a
Ref. Michael Green (1977), The Truth of God Incarnate. p.18. [‘… natural and intelligible that Jesus should
come to be hailed as son of God, and that later this poetry should have hardened into prose, and escalated from
a metaphorical son of God to a metaphysical God the Son’ (quoting from Hick in the Ch. 9: Jesus and the
World Religion. in Hick, The Myth of God Incarnate, p.176).
“… the explicit, unambiguous claim of the many writers who go to makeup the NT that Jesus was
metaphysically but not metaphorically one with the Almighty God” p.41 (‘one with’ - not ‘one as’??’).

[The phrase ‘the Son of God’ is accompanied in the Nicene Creed by the phase ‘God from God’ and ‘true God
from true God’.] [A third God (person) “God the Holy Ghost” completes the Trinitarian formula.]
257
 [‘Elohim’ is the IRENT translation word for ‘the God’ Gk. ho theos.] [Note: in NT the word ‘son’
whether it occurs in the fixed phrase ‘son of Elohim’ or ‘God’s son’, it always refers to a son of a human
being, that is ‘son-of-man’– not God-man or demigod.]
• a son of Elohim’ – Mt 27:40;
• son of Elohim – Mk 1:1 v.l.
• a God’s Son – Mt 27:43
• the son of Elohim – Mt 26:63; Jn 1:34, 49; 5:25, etc.

Linguistically and literary God does not have a son or sons; it is only possible to say so as a metaphoric,
not ontological statement. [cf. Islamic objection is from their inability to transcend ‘literal translation’, i.e.
son is only son.]

When we say ‘Yeshua is the son of Elohim (> the God)’, it only means ‘Yeshua is as the son of Elohim’.
It is only for His title, not reality or name. The expression does not hint ‘Son of God’ up in the heavens as
‘God the Son’ on the right hand of God the Father, and God the Holy Ghost on the left hand. Nor does it
hint that the Son of God = God the Son became human being with the theme of ‘Logos’ itself being
superfluous.

The Word [ho Logos]

Cf. ‘ho Logos hen para ton Theon’ – Jn 1:1b /the Word was with God – most; /the Word was with the
God (cf. Jn 1:1c ‘was God’); /the Word was towards Elohim;

[2Sam 7:14 YHWH to David the Covenant: “… I will be his Father and he shall be my Son.” Cf. Rm 1:3]

[Someone is called ‘Son of God’ does not mean that he was actually a ‘son’ of God. It is simply relational
term. Nor does to call a human being ‘Son of God’ mean that he was somewhere and somehow with God
before he was born as a human being, but not as human person! The phrase ‘son of someone or something’
is a common Hebrew idiom to describe one’s character. The verb ‘is’ is nefarious and does not simply mean
to be identical or same, but often means ‘is as (something / someone)’.
Cf. www.bible-researcher.com/Strauss.LiteralFallacy.pdf ]

[It is ‘son’ that is defined in relation to ‘father’, not the other way round. /xx: God the Son. The relation in the
Scripture of Elohim and Yeshua Mashiah – Father and Son –is altered initially as a binitarianism (of Father +
Son) (at First Council of Nicaea in 325 C.E.), which then became to the full-blown Trinitarianism
(Father+Son+Holy Spirit) when a statement on ‘the Holy Spirit’ is expanded along with insertion of the
controversial Filioque-clause 381 C.E. in First Council of Constantinople.] [www.ucg.org/bible-study-
tools/booklets/is-god-a-trinity p. 6] [Linguistically the word son is well defined. To extend its use beyond
biological social human father-son relationship, it can be only metaphoric. That someone ‘is a son of God’, or
‘is the Son of God’ (= ‘the God’ = translated in IRENT as ‘Elohim’), it is in the sense of ‘as a son of’ or ‘as
the Son of’. In IRENT often this ‘as’ is inserted to clarify this point. This is also a common linguistic problem
with the verb ‘is’ (third, masculine, singular). See ref. <The Nefarious ‘IS’> in Collections for Supplement
III.

258
‘Son of God’ ‘Son of David’
Titles on Yeshua – the Son of God (< the son of Elohim); Son of the Most-High; the Son of David – all these
were bestowed on the human person of Yeshua.

• Lk 1:35; Rm 1:3-4 ‘God’s Son’ [/x: the Son of God]

Act 13:33 ‘You are my son; today I have begotten you.”
Mk 1:11 ‘You are my beloved son”

• ‘a son of David’ (Son of David): (appears only in Synoptic Gospels) Usually ‘a son
of David’ (incl. vocative) as to Yeshua, in the sense of ‘(taken) as a son of David’.
[Cf. Different nuance with a definite article – ‘the Son of David’ (Mt 12:23; 21:9)
in the sense of the particular Son of David, the Mashiah of OT.] ['Mashiah' is an
anointed for a king, a priest or a prophet – not 'Christ of Church', not 'Cosmic Christ',
not 'God the Son' of Trinitarian lingo.] [Cf. Rm 1:3 ‘from David’s seed’ [= ‘he was
as a David’s seed’, not ‘he was the Son of David’]

[As Howard Marshall puts it, "In the use of the title by Jesus it was His awareness of a special relationship to
God which was the determining factor rather than a messianic use of the title or the Hellenistic idea of the
'divine man'.
Ref: Bess: On a definition of the title ‘Son of God’ in the Synoptics
http://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1022&context=fac_dis – a copy is in IRENT
III Supplement (Collections #3 ‘Some references on trinity’).]

‘the only-and-one son of Elohim’;

‘the son of Elohim’ – this title appears together with another title ‘Mashiah’. Not another expression for
‘God the Son’, ‘the second Person of Trinity God’, or ‘Cosmic Christ’. Cf. ‘son of God’ ‘God’s son’. It
bears the primary weight of claims made concerning Yeshua Mashiah’s unique, singular, and exclusive
relationship with Elohim whom He called Abba (Father). This does not provide the starting point for a
Christology of preexistence or incarnation.

The son-of-man (the Son of Man), the son of Elohim, the Son – the titles Yeshua carried or accepted.
Not as a Hebrew messianic title or a Greek divine man.

Ref.: https://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/otesources/23a-
prophets/text/articles/bess-sonofgod-gtj.pdf S. Herbert Bess

The expression ‘son’ in the Bible should not be taken to refer to origin or to generation
(e.g. ‘son of so-and-so’, incl. descendants), rather to special relationship. Being a son of
God does not imply ideas of ‘deity of the son’, or ‘eternal generation of God the Son’ as
entertained by the heretic unbiblical illogical Trinitarian thought. The expression ‘son of
something/someone’ is a typical Hebrew idiom.

‘begotten’

Psalm 2:7 (quoted 3x in Acts 13:33; Heb 1:5, 5:5) – the verb does not refer to
generation.

“Taking the verb in Psa. 2:7 to be declarative, i.e., hiphil, that verse may be translated
as follows: <. . . Thou art my Son; this day have I declared thy sonship>. To understand

259
the verb as declarative removes from it, of course, any necessary reference to
beginnings.” (See Bess, p. 22)

monogēnes ‘only begotten’

• 3x for an only child of a parent, e.g. widow's son (Lk 7:2), to Jairus' only daughter
(Lk 8:42), and to another only child (Lk 9:38)]
• 5x in reference to Yeshua (Mashiah) (Jn 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1Jn 4:9).
• 1x referring back to Isaac of Abraham (Heb 11:17).

prototokos ‘*firstborn’
Rm 8:29; Col 1:15, 18; Rev 1:5; Heb 1:6 – ‘of first rank’ - cannot be taken as ‘origin’.

Note his wrong concluding remarks from Trinitarianism:

The terms "son," "firstborn," "only begotten," and "begotten," as defined by the Bible's own use of them,
all declare that Jesus is the uncreated, ungenerated, coeternal, co-equal Son of God the Father.

Scripturally and theologically the utmost important title for Yeshua concerning who He is. A
personal ‘title’ – a designation attached to an individual in virtue of some distinction from such
rank, office, privilege, attainment, or notable aspects. Though it may describe someone's position
or job, it is used in the sense that it tells who the person is. (Syn. appellation). The term ‘Son’ vs.
‘Father’ – these are relational terms and have nothing to do with a biological or social one, even
in terms of analogy (e.g. as used by Augustine on Trinity). Many have this misconception
outright (like a Muslims’ view on it) and unknowingly. God is only as Father as the Son revealed
about relationality btw Father-Son and God-Creation. As to Yeshua throughout NT being the
Son denotes His unique relation to God. It is not to state that ‘He is our Father’, but it is to call
upon Him, saying ‘Father!’ – the One who comes as Father for our sake.

(1) ho huios tou theou –26x; (literally ‘the son of the God’). e.g. (/x: God’s son – ALT) Most
renders this phrase as ‘the Son of God’. IRENT renders it as ‘the son of Elohim’.
Mt 26:63; Mk 3:11; Lk 4:41; Lk 22:70;
Jn 1:34, 49; 5:25; 11:4, 27; 20:31;
Act 9:20; 2Co 1:19; Gal 2:20; Eph 4:13; Heb 4:14; 6:6; 7:3; 10:29;
1Jn 3:8; 4:15; 5:5, 10, 12, 13, 20; Rev 2:18;

(2) theou huios –13x; ‘Gods son’ (x: the Son of God). Mt 14:33; 27:43, 54;
[The particular example in Mt 27:54; //Mk 15:39 is a Greek translation of Latin phrase Filii
Dei, a title for Caesar, from the lips of a Roman centurion. Not in the sense of ‘son of Elohim’.]
(2-a) huios theou – Mk_1:1 v.l; Lk_1:35; Jn 19:7;
(2-b) huios ~~ theou –Mt 4:3, 6; 27:40; Mk 15:39; Lk_ 4:3, 9;
(3) huios tou theou –1x; (literally ‘son of the God’) – ‘son of Elohim’ ‘son of God’ (x: the Son of God);
{Mk 1:1}; Mt 8:29; Jn_10:36; 1 Jn 4:15: Jn 20:30-31:
(3) ho huios tou theou – ‘the son of Elohim’ ‘the son of God’ 1 Jn 4:15: Jn 20: 31:

Related ones: [See also * Logos]

• the son of Elohim (> the Son of God) – ‘a son of (something or someone)’ is a
Hebrew idiom which brings out a certain character/nature of
something/someone, or being a member of the class. The definite article
particularizes the person – one, only, and unique. (Cf. monogēnes huios ‘only-
begotten/only-brought-forth son’ in G-Jn). The phrase ‘son of Elohim’ is used as
260
 a messianic title (Cf. ‘Son of David’) [e.g. a composite expression ‘the Mashiah,
the son of Elohim’ – Jn 20:31]. It is not about divinity of the son (as in Christian
jargon ‘God the Son’). In pagan usage, ‘son of God’ is a common expression in
mythology and Emperor worship = ‘someone like God’ ‘divine’, etc.
• the son-of-man – (/Son of Man); that is, ‘man’ (Aramaic idiom). Yeshua himself
used it as circumlocution of I – related to a heavenly (messianic) figure in Dan
7:13.
• The Last Adam – 1Co 15:45;
• the Word, that it, the Word of Elohim (Jn 1:1)
• the Word Incarnate, not God Incarnate (Incarnate God) (Jn 1:14) [See an entry
below for *incarnation]
• the Word of Elohim (Rev 19:13)
• *Immanuel (Mt 1:23): [Heb. ‫ אֵל ִׁעמָנּו‬Immanuel; /Gk. Ἐμμανουήλ Emmanuel] [The word
‘Immanuel’ as a Hebrew theophoric namea in Isa 7:14 (Cf. Isa 8:8, 10 – 'El is with us'). A person
with a theophoric name cannot be ‘God’ himself.]

‘Elohim’ ░░ ho theo – with arthrous noun = the God; cf. {x: /theos – [a] God or God-being}
anarthrous variant without the article.]

‘With us is Elohim’ ░░ (meth' hēmōn ho theos) /God is with us –HCSB, GW, NLT; /Our God is
with us – Aramaic; /x: God with us – KJV, most; /xxx: With us he is God. – YLT; [Isa 8:11 gives
this meaning of the word Immanuel. It does not mean ‘(a) God with us’, nor it does ‘he is God (who
is) with/among us’ (in the line of ‘God-man’ as a god walking on earth disguised as a man). YHWH
makes His presence to be with His people in the person of His ‘Son’ (not ‘Godman’), Yeshua, in His
Kingdom reign. [Cf. Exo 3:12 ‘I will be [with you].];
[Closely related to ‘Incarnate Word (the logos) of Elohim’ of Jn 1:14; //1Tm 3:16] [Jn 20:28 b ‘my
Elohim!’ is thematically in the sense of Immanuel.] [Cf. ‘the (God) was revealed in flesh (1Tm 3:16
v.l.)]

Divinity of the Son:

unbiblical claims of ‘Jehovah = Jesus’

‘Jehovah is Jesus’ ‘Jesus is called Jehovah’ - meaning Jesus and Jehovah are identified
as the same person. – [this is even beyond the Trinitarian claims.]
• https://carm.org/christianity/christian-doctrine/jehovah-jesus
• www.spurgeon.org/~phil/articles/deity.htm
• www.christiancourier.com/articles/527-is-jesus-jehovah
• Roger R. Keller, “Jesus is Jehovah (YHWH): A Study in the Gospels,” in Jesus Christ:
Son of God, Savior, ed. Paul H. Peterson, Gary L. Hatch, and Laura D. Card (Provo,
UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 2002), 120–151.

Cf. ‘making himself stand equal to Elohim (the God)’ – Jn 5:18 [cf. equal vs. identical vs. same
vs. similar]
Cf. Jn 10:30 I and the Father — we are as one [for them] [in Life and Love] [←5:18] [→ v. 33]
[17:11] [Cf. 14:28; 10:15]

a
Another example: Israel, meaning "who prevails with God".
b
[Jn 20:28 ‘O my Lord and my Elohim!’ ░░ /My Lord and my God; Thomas encounters the risen Lord
and experiences presence of Elohim as fulfilment of Immanuel. Not that Yeshua is ‘God’, or ‘his God’, nor
same as ‘YHWH’. /x: You are my Lord and my God]
261
 cf. ‘make himself what God is (i.e. a God-being) – Jn 10:33
Cf. the Mashiah, the son of Elohim – Mt 26:63 etc.

‘human person’; ‘human being’ vs. ‘divine person’ 'divine man', ‘divine being (God-being)’ vs.
a 'deity' vs. 'god'; 'demigod'; god-man; [Cf. god in Gnostic world view
(http://gnosis.org/gnintro.htm Sophia = Demiurgos)]

Cf. ‘sons of God’ ‘son of God’

‘Son of God’ in figurative use in OT:

A title for the angel – Dan 3:25 "(the one) like a son of Elah" (Aramaic – god) /of
the gods – most; /of a god – NET; /of God – KJV; /of the gods – NAS77;
People of Israel – Wis 18:13
Righteous individual Israelites Wis 2:18; Sir 4:10
Anointed (King) Ps 2:2, 7
Messianic: No clearly attested ones in pre-Christian Jewish literature; DSS 4Q246

*sons of Elohim ('sons of the God')

OT – Gen 6:2, 4; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7

[Cf. Lk 3:38 Adam as son of Elohim; 1Jn 3:1 - believers as ‘God’s children’]; /xx: heavenly beings; /xx:
angels; [Many take it in Job as ‘angels’ from unbiblical pagan idea with angels copulating human
(women). https://youtu.be/E0_OFMpiE3w

cf. Heb 1:4-6 'son of Elohim' – Yeshua; a title not for angels are never called as His son.

NT – Lk 20:36; Rm 8:14, 19; Gal 3:24; (4:6); Mt 5:9; (Heb 12:7);

Cf. 'Adam, son of Elohim' (Lk 3:38).
Cf. 'children of God' (S5043 tekna) – Rm 8:16, 17; Phi 2:15; Jn 1:12; 1Jn 3:1, 2;
Cf. Yeshua → a son of Elohim → the son of Elohim → the only-gotten Son [of Elohim S3439
monogenēs] (Jn 3:16, 18; 1Jn 4:9) – in turn, elaborated as Church doctrine into the only-
begotten God (Jn 1:18 v.l.) → God the Son → God Jesus → YHWH=Jesus – unbiblical
evolution of human doctrines.

Angels, just and pious men, the descendants of Seth, were called "sons of God" (Job 1:6; 2:1;
Psa 89:7; Wis 2:13; etc.). In a similar manner it was given to Israelites (Deu 14:50); and of
Israel, as a nation, we read: "And thou shalt say to him: Thus saith the Lord: Israel is my son,
my firstborn. I have said to thee: Let my son go, that he may serve me". (Exo 4:22 sq.).
www.newadvent.org/cathen/14142b.htm [Linguistically and literarily, it is as sons of God; not
that they are literally sons of God.]

262
the *son-of-man (the *Son of man)

the son-of-man░░

ho huios tou anthrōpou (‘the son of the man’) (with arthrous words); [in the sense of a man (human
being) in Aramaic idiom].

It is rendered usually as ‘the Son of man’ or, by some, ‘the Son of Man’. IRENT renders it
as ‘the son-of-man’ (with hyphenated and uncapitalized) – when the phrase was used in NT
as Yeshua’s self-designation. [cf. the Son of man – KJV, ASV; the Son of Man – most]. This
is indeed his most characteristic form of self-reference; essentially functions as a semantic
equivalent for the first-person pronoun (Gk. egō "I") as a circumlocution of ‘I’, but avoiding
drawing too much attention to oneself.]

Translated as
• the Son of Man – most; /
• the Son of man – KJV+, AMP, AUV, GSNT; /
• the SON of MAN – Diagl (in all caps in the original); /
• /x: Son of Humanity – ALT; /x: Son of Mankind (CLV) - attempts to get rid of the
word ‘man’, under the influence of gender inclusiveness movement, fail to bring out
correct sense; bring in different sense and nuance.
• Son of Adam – ISR;

In NT occurs over 80 places (as in NASB translation) (including Mt 18:11 v.l.; Lk 9:56 v.l.). In the
Gospels it is used exclusively by Yeshua as circumlocution of ‘I’ or allusion to Himself.

32x ?- Mt 8:20; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8; 12:32; 12:40; 13:37; 13:41; 16:13, 27, 28; 17:9; 17:12;
17:22; 18:11 v.l.; 19:28; 20:18; 20:28; 24:27; 24:30; 24:37; 24:39; 24:44; 25:31; 26:2; 26:24; 26:45;
26:64

14x ? – Mk 2:10; 2:28; 8:31; 8:38; 9:9; 9:12; 9:31; 10:33; 10:45; 13:26; 14:21; 14:41; 14:62; (13x)
26x ? – Lk 5:24; 6:5; 6:22; 7:34; 9:22; 9:26; 9:44; 9:56 v.l., 58; 11:30; 12:8; 12:10; 12:40; 17:22;
17:24; 17:26; 17:30; 18:8; 18:31; 19:10; 21:27; 21:36; 22:22; 22:48; 22:69; 24:7; (25x)
12x – Jn 1:51; 6:53; 12:23; 13:31.] [Cf. Only once in Jn 5:27; ‘a son of a man’]

Outside the Gospels, only once in Act 7:56 (with ‘Son of God’ as v.l.) in which the risen Lord was
referred to from Stephen’s voice.

263
Ref: Delbert Burkett, "Review on Tuckett (1999), The Son of Man Debate. A History and
Evaluation" Biblica Vol. 82, No. 3 (2001), pp. 438-440 www.jstor.org/stable/42614315 (A copy in
the Collection).

SourceNT p.40.

ho huios tou anthropou, meaning a person associated with humanity, a translation of bar nasha,
an Aramaic periphrasis for “person”, would be read word for word as “one associated with
humanity” (as it is in non-gender specific language and word “humanity” is in the singular).
However, bar nasha means “one associated with people”, “a person”, “the person”, “humanity”,
“the representative person”. The Anchor Bible translates “The Man”. The title is a direct reference
to Daniel 7:13-14. See lengthy discussion in J. Massingberd Ford, “‘Son of Man’ – A
Euphemism?” JBL 87 (1968), 257-67: Albright, W.F. and Mann, C.S. Matthew: A New
Translation with Introduction and Commentary, (New York: Doubleday, 1982), pp.
CLVI-CLVII, 95; G. Dalman, The Works of Jesus, Eng. trans. by D.M. Kay, (Edinburgh,
1902); V. Taylor, op. cit., p. 197.

huios, with a noun refers to a member of a class of people, and should not be translated as
“son/child of…” The Benai Israel, translated in the KJV as “children/sons of Israel” should be
translated as “members of the class of people called Israel” = “Israelites”. The expression is also
Greek, and found as early as Homer.

Note also that, anthropos, is the word for human, humanity, person. Grammatically, it is the
common gender and not the masculine.

From: Larry W. Hurtado (2003), Lord Jesus Christ – Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity
pp. 290-306:

It occurs some 81 times altogether in the four canonical Gospels (14x in G-Mk, 30x in G-Mt, 25x
in G-Lk, and 12x in G-Jn). In all these cases the Greek form of the expression includes the definite
article in a stereotyped and formulaic construction, ho huios tau anthropou. It is not a title; it
always functions as Jesus’ self-designation, indeed his most characteristic form of self-reference.
In fact, where it appears, "the son of man" essentially functions as a semantic equivalent for the
emphatic first-person pronoun ("I/me/my").

Additionally, the expression appears only once in the rest of the New Testament (Act 7:56), and is
never used as a confessional title for Jesus. That is, the phrase never functions itself to express an
honorific claim made about Jesus. Even within the Gospels no one ever addresses Jesus as "the
son of man," proclaims him to be such, or contests his own use of the expression; and it never
functions with the several other appellations bandied about as possible categories for Jesus, such
as "a prophet/one of the prophets," John the Baptizer, Messiah, Son of God/the Blessed (e.g., Mk
6:14-15; 8:27-29; 14:62; Mt 26:63; and cf. also the various appellatives directed to John the Baptizer
in John 1:25).

QQ As a Messianic title after the phrase in Daniel (someone like a son of man)?

'heavenly Son of Man' – unbiblical term.

264
 This contrast to the epithet ‘the son of the living Elohim’ (Mt 16:16) (Shimon Kefa calls Him); ‘a
son of Elohim’ Lk 4:3 (the devil challenges Him), or ‘the son of Elohim’ (> ‘the Son of God’) as
the unclean spirits hailed Him – Mk 3:11;

‘a son of man’

Rev 1:13; homoion huion anthrōpou; 14:14 homoios huiō anthrōpou

a figure resembling a son of man ░░ [‘son of human being’ - someone resembling a human
being. The Aramaic phrase in Dan 7:13 referring to a messianic figure.

1:13 (I saw ~~) a figure resembling a son of man░░ ‘(saw) (one) like son of man’ – KIT; [both
anarthrous – ‘a man’s son’]. [ ‘like ~’ is ambiguous where heard outside the immediate context.]
[i.e. a human being; as a Messianic figure in Dan 7:13 (in Aramaic portion Dan 2:4 - 7:28) – ‘a man-
like figure – FF Bruce p. 67.] [Cf. similar anarthrous phrase’ in Heb 2:6]
[cf. ὁ Υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου – ‘the son of the man’ (‘the son-of-man’ in IRENT; most renders as
‘the Son of man’; Cf. the Son of Man – ESV, etc.), used Yeshua’s self-designation, appears all
Gospels and Act 7:56).] [See GG]; /a figure like one of the sons of men – Cass! (cf. 14:14 ‘one
that bore resemblance to a son of man); /a figure like man – TNT (- cf. 14:14 - a seated figure
like that of a man); /someone like a son of man – NWT; /one like a son of man – LEB; /one like
the Son of Man - WNT; /x: a Son of Man – JNT; /x: ‘perhaps’ the Human Son, - ToY; /what
looked like a human being – GNB; /one like unto the Son of man – KJV; /someone like the Son of
Man – ISV; / [who looked] like a son of man [i.e., Jesus. See vv. 17-18] - AUV; /someone like the
Son of Man –GW;
need to copy a complete phrase for items below:
/a son of man - NET, ESV duo, NASB, HNV, NIV trio, BBE; /a Son of Man – JNT, ERV, AMP,
Rhm; /x: a son of mankind – CLV; /x; a man – TCNT; /x: a human being – GNB, Mft; /xx: the Son
of man – KJV+, Murdock, Etheridge; /x: the Son of Man – NKJV, HCSB, CEV, ISV, CEV, NLT;
/[the] Son of Humanity [or, a son of humanity] - ALT; /xx: the Son of Adam – ISR; /

Heb 2:6b ‘a son of man’ ░░ [huios anthrōpou – both anarthrous in GNT, MT, LXX – 'a man's son']
[IRENT rendering the noun phrase as a title, as it is referred to in v. 7. The same anarthrous phrase
appears in Rev 1:13 and 14:14 from Dan 7:13 where it is a Messianic figure.] [serves connecting ‘man’
v. 6a to implicit ‘the Son of the man’ (Yeshua’s self-designation in the Gospels and Acts) in v.7-8];
/xx: the son of man – most, KJV+, NET, ESV duo, NASB, HCSB, JNT, ISR, AMP, Mft, PNT, BBE,
Rhm, ISV, NIV, Wuest, Cass, TNT; /a son of man – Diagl, YLT, NLT, WNT, ACV; /a Son of Man –
TCNT; /x: the Son of Man – GW; /a son of mankind- CLV;; /the Son of man – Etheridge; /?: the
son of man [i.e. mankind] – AUV; /[the] son of humanity – ALT; /son of man – Darby; /x: any man –
GSNT; /Ko. 사람의 아들이; /人子; /人の子; - JSS; /x: weaklings – CEV; /x: human beings – NRSV,
GNB, TNIV; /x: mortals – NRSV; /xx: (omit) – MSG!!; /[QQQ Need to check reference to ‘man’ or
‘the Son of Man’/ ‘Messiah’ in Psalm 8:4.] [Some translations lose verbal connection; thus, echo of
OT prophecy may be lost.] [

265
*Incarnation
'incarnation' - metaphor of ‘Incarnate Word of Elohim’ – metaphoric for ‘embodiment’. Cf. ‘re-
incarnation’

‘Myth of God Incarnate’ – unbiblical, similar to (a partial) reincarnation in pagan religions –

intimately mixed with ‘virgin birth’ of virginal conception of the one called virgin-born ‘Jesus’
who is believed as God-man or demigod (for the Trinitarians mind) walking on earth who could
perform supernatural miracles (incl. walking on water without getting drowned) and on His own
power and in His own name He could forgive sins people committed against God. ‘Incarnate
Jesus’? ‘Incarnate God’?

Ref:
• John Hick, ed. (1977), The Myth of God Incarnate.
• John Hick (1993, 2005), The Metaphor of God Incarnate – Christology in a pluralistic
age. [Esp. Ch. 10 Divine incarnation as metaphor pp. 99-111.]
• Michael Goulder, ed., (1979), Incarnation and Myth – The Debate Continued
• Michael Green, ed. (1977), The Truth of God Incarnate
• Oskar Skarsaune (1991), Incarnation – Myth or Fact?
• http://home.earthlink.net/~mysticalrose/pagan2.html IS THE INCARNATION A
PAGAN CONCEPT?

Jn 1:14 became as flesh ░░ = 'embodied'

sarx egeneto ('incarnate', not 'became flesh', but became as flesh'; not turned into a human
being)

"Incarnate Logos" (not 'God Incarnate' or 'Incarnate God') in Jn 1:14 tells the embodiment
of the very God's Word in the person of Yeshua. 'flesh' is something of a human being ('flesh
and blood'), but not same as a human being or person – here used metaphorically which is
pointed to the Yeshua's flesh (metaphorical) being the 'bread of Elohim' (Jn 6:33); 'the bread
of the life' (Jn 6:35, 48), 'the bread from the heaven' ('manna) (Jn 6:31-33, 41) = 'his flesh to
eat' which he offers to his follows (Jn 6:51, 53-56).

Not that 'God' became a human being, to be born of a virgin, as a demigod or a so-called
god-man, by being put into the womb of a virgin in the myth of virginal conception and
virgin birth. Not unbiblical 'virgin birth' but thematically related Yeshua being Immanuel.
[→ Immanuel Mt 1:23 (‘With us is Elohim’ in Yeshua)]

/became flesh' – most; /x: was made flesh – KJV, Delitzsch; /xx: became a human being –
GNB, CEV, TransLine fn; /xx: became human – NLT, GW, NTPE.

Gk. ho logos here does not point to a God-being who was 'somehow' put into the womb of a
'virgin' as the Trinitarian doctrine has come up. If a God-being literally came down and put
into her womb, it cannot be 'incarnate', nothing but 'reincarnate' (a prevalent in various
religions)
'the Word' is not the person of Yeshua – conceived in the Trinitarian mind as a pre-existing
'Jesus' in God form – 'God Jesus' 'God the Son'. What the God's Word is, is now embodied in
the very person of Yeshua, who is called to be the son of Elohim (cf. Mt 3:17 'this is my Son,

266
 the beloved, I'm taking delight in him'); not made into a human being; not that the 'word' took
human nature. Not that ‘God became man’.] [‘truth of incarnate Logos’; not ‘myth of God
Incarnate’]

G-John – ‘Yeshua is as the divine and eternal Word of God (not ‘Jesus is the divine person, not the
human person, God Jesus …’).

Incarnation , a technical theological term, a doctrinal lingo,a literally means embodied in

flesh or taking on flesh. It refers to the conception and birth of a sentient being who is the
material manifestation of an entity, god or force whose original nature is immaterial. In its
religious context the word is used to mean the descent from Heaven of a god, or divine being
in human/animal form on Earth. The incarnational doctrine as at the core of the Trinitarian
doctrine, is not in the Bible, nor it is biblically correct.

Problem or controversy of Incarnation arises not about of such idea/concept shown clearly
in the NT. The ‘incarnation’ in the Scripture – only a single verse, Jn 1:14, speaks directly
about the incarnation idea. It is the problem of belief or beliefs in incarnation going beyond
what the Scripture tells that stirs up contentions – fundamentally because all ignore the only
Scriptural phrase ‘Incarnation of the Word (logos) (of Elohim) and, in its place, they have
such theological jargon based on the Trinitarianism, which is essentially tritheisticb when
viewed linguistically and logically. These are: ‘Incarnate God’, ‘God Incarnate’,
‘Incarnation of God’ – all with undefined meaning of the word ‘God’ and with the core
belief of God the Son.

A biblical expression is of ‘Incarnate Logos’, not a doctrinal ‘God incarnate’. It is pure and
straightforward the ‘embodiment of the Word of God’ in a person. It is at the core of the
faith in the historical Yeshua, the one who was believed as the Mashiah of Elohim, as
Elohim’s Incarnate Wisdom, as the son of Elohim, as Elohim’s agent in creation and
salvation, and who was believed to be the only Son brought forthc by Elohim (not ‘pre-
existent’ or ‘eternal’ Son, as if a God-being has a son, thus two god-beings).

It is the incarnation of the Word of Elohim which we find uniquely here in the Scripture (Jn 1:1,
14), the Word (the Logos) being the self-expression of Elohim’s will in acts, and not an incarnation
of a ‘personally pre-existing Son’ ‘(pre-existing) Cosmic Christ’ as in The expression ‘Incarnate
God’ or ‘God Incarnate’ is a self-serving jargon of Trinitarianism with the unbiblical concept of
‘God the Son’. d Yeshua of Nazareth was born as Immanuel (‘Elohim with us’ – Mt 1:23) – YHWH
Elohim to be with His people in the person of Yeshua. It is not that ‘Jesus’ is the incarnation of the

a
Cf. Act 14:11-15 – gods ~~ have come down to us ░░ [gods have become like human beings.] [Rieu, p. 145 endnote:
Local stories and inscriptions give additional evidence that Zeus and Hermes were worshipped in the district. The
Roman poet Ovid gave Lystra as the scene of his story of the visit of Jupiter and Mercury to the faithful couple Baucis
and Philemon. (Here in the text) the peasants welcome the reappearance of the gods.]
Cf. The concept of incarnation is unrelated to a religious belief in Reincarnation as in Hinduism, Buddhism, etc.
Cf. primitive thinking of a person holding spirit of a deceased comes [E.g. Mt 16:14]
b
tritheism – three god-beings (god-persons). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tritheism [Cf. Jehovah’s
Witnesses – two god-beings of the Almighty Jehovah God and the mighty god of Jesus Christ.] [Cf. demigods
of Classical mythology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demigod ]
c
Gk. monogenēs (‘only one brought forth’): ‘only begotten’ – KJV (archaic, jargon); /x: ‘one-and-only’; /x:
‘unique’;
d
From metaphoric ‘Son of God’ to metaphysical ‘God the Son’, the one who is viewed as sitting next to God
the Father (‘at His right hand’).
267
Son of God – such is a pure Trinitarian idea; but Yeshua Mashiah as Immanuel is the Son of God –
his Sonship granted (‘begotten’) by Elohim (Heb 5:5).

Yeshua from Nazareth was a human being, and a human person, not 'half man and half god', nor
'fully man and fully god'. (some Trinitarians claim that their ‘Jesus’ was not a human person, but a
divine person, without giving a clear definition of the word ‘person’). A human person cannot be a
‘divine person’, unless the word ‘divine’ is used as a watered-down expression, which itself has
nothing to do with the divine reality. What is ‘pre-existent’ is the Logos acting as the sole agent of
God’s creative activities and first brought-forth over all the creation. The Word (Logos) of Elohim
thus cannot be a creature by some God; it is of God (cf. Jn 1:1c).

As it is shown to be a divine mystery which underlies the Hebrew concept of Immanuel, it

cannot be taken as a myth (whatever ‘myth’ means). As such there is no justifiable,
reasonable, and logical way that to have it understood as a metaphor.

Incarnation – why He came: (12 forgotten reasons of ‘Christmas’- from the theme of a collected list
by John Piper). [translation – see IRENT]

‘Jesus is God in flesh’ [sic] – What does it mean by ‘flesh’? Does the phrase mean by ‘Jesus is God’?
What does in mean by ‘God in flesh’? or ‘As God in flesh?’

incarnate God? incarnate Eternal Son of God? incarnate God the Son?
‘Yeshua is as the incarnate Word of Elohim’; ‘The Word of Elohim is not Jesus’. ‘The Word was not
(pre-existent) Jesus’ or 'unbegotten God'. Embodiment of the Word of Elohim in the person of Yeshua
(not 'God Jesus') – with the full authority bestowed to do the will of Elohim in his obedience – authority
to forgive 'sins', to perform God's mighty works ('miracles'), not because he was God [the Son], but the
'only-begotten Son, of Elohim.

'demigod' – a being who is partly mortal human, party divine god as in mythology.
'divine person' – someone with divine quality. 'God is divine' is oxymoronic, just as 'father is a fatherly
person'.

God-man – a Trinitarian docetic jargon - "This substance of a soul, then, being intermediate between
God and the flesh – it being impossible for the nature of God to intermingle with a body without an
intermediate instrument – the God-man is born." Origen, De Principiis, Book II, Chapter VI. On the
Incarnation of the Christ, 203-250 A.D. [quoted in Wikipedia]

1. “I have been born for this purpose, and it is for this purpose that I have come into the world that
I should bear witness to the truth” (Jn 18:37).
2. “To this purpose the son of Elohim was revealed that he shall destroy the doings of the Devil”
(1Jn 3:8; cf. Heb 2:14-15).
3. “Those who are health have no need of a physician, but those who are sick do; I have come not
to call the righteous, but outcast sinners” (Mk 2:17).
4. “The son-of-man came to seek and to save the lost” (Lk 19:10).
5. “The son-of-man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many”
(Mk 10:45).
6. “God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under
the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons” (Gal 4:5).
7. “Yes, in this way has Elohim dearly loved the very world He created, that He gave the one-and-
only Son, so that everyone who comes to believe in his Son is not to get perished, but ta have
Life eternal. The fact is, Elohim sent forth His Son into the world not to have the world judged
into condemnation; on the contrary; to have the world saved through the Son.” (Jn 3:16).
8. “Elohim sent the only-begotten Son of Him into the world, so that we shall live through the
Son” (1Jn 4:9).
268
 9. “I have come in order that they may have Life, yes, they may have it to overflow” (Jn 10:10).
10. “Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising of many in Israel, and for a sign that is spoken
against . . . that the thoughts of many may be revealed” (Lk 2:34f).
11. “He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at
liberty those who are oppressed” (Lk 4:18).
12. “… Mashiah Yeshua has become – to show God’s truthfulness – a ministering-servant for those
who are of ‘brit-milah’ (circumcision rite), making good on the promises made to them to the
Patriarchs. The Gentiles on their part were to praise Elohim for His mercy.” (Rm 15:7-8; cf. Jn
12:27.).

Vocabulary – the Incarnate Logos of Elohim; /the Word Incarnate; /Incarnate Christ; /x: Incarnate God; /x:
God Incarnate; /?? The Incarnate Lord; [‘Incarnation of God’ -? Incarnation (of the Logos) from Elohim; not
God incarnating.]

Through incarnation ‘divinity meets humanity’.

Jn 1:14 the very Word of Elohim became as flesh ░░ [ho logos sarx egeneto] ['> became flesh' >>
'made flesh' – all in figurative expression. The Gk. idiom is 'became embodied' in English idiom. Not
the word became literal flesh, not it became a human being. Not God the Son what came down from the
heaven and, by the Holy Ghost, made enter into the womb of Maria to be born not as a man but God-
man or demigod. This is not actually 'conception'; there is no room for this picture in the word of
'conception'! Yes, there is such a thing called 'virgin got pregnant', but it does not mean there was no
male to the process of conception. It is palatable for only those who believe mythological virgin birth of
gods as literally true, but do not want to read the Bible as it was written as it was for the people entirely
different culture, life, mindset, and religious practices in the agricultural society in the ancient time
almost two millennia ago. Our mindset with everything in our society and culture is totally alien to them.

From EE Various translations:

/x: thus the Logos made Himself become flesh-and-blood [of true humanity] – ARJ; /x: ~~ [of true
human reality] – ARJ; /become a human being of flesh-and-blood – ARJ; /~ become what flesh-and-
blood is – ARJ; /x: So the Word became a creature of flesh and blood – Cass; / So the word of God
became a human being – PNT; /And the Word, entering a new mode of existence, became flesh, -
Wuest; / And the Word [or, the Expression of [divine] Logic] became flesh – ALT; /And the Word
became flesh – ESV trio, NET (Now ~), Diagl, ISR, WNT (x: ~came~), MRC, Murdock, Rhm, NKJV;
/And the Word was made flesh – KJV+, Etheridge; /So the Word became flesh – NWT, GSNT, BBE
(And so ~); />>The Word became a human being – JNT, NIrV, GNB; /The Word became flesh –
HCSB, NIV duo, ISV; />> And the Word became Man – TCNT; /The Word became human – GW, NLT
(So ~); /x: The Word became a man – ERV; /x: And the Word (Christ) became flesh (human,
incarnate) – AMP; / [Eventually] this Word became a human being – AUV; /x: The Word became
flesh and blood, (and moved into the neighborhood). – MSG;

/ことばは 人となって – JSS;

/말씀이 육신이 되어 – KKJV, KRV;
/x: 몸된 인간 ; />> ~ 인간이 되셔서;
/xxxx: ~ 육신이라는 살코기가 (flesh meat?) 되셔서 – Pastor Cho HJ;
/xxxx: 말씀되시는 그리스도께서 사람이 되어 – KLB (- Logos is not Messiah; nor the preexistent Jesus,
or God the Son.;

the very Word

\the Word – most; /that Word – Geneva; /the same word – Bishops; /this Word – AUV; / [It is not
‘the God’ v.1b who became flesh. Most misreads to lead to a wrong Trinitarian understanding.]
[Trinitarians often misquote this verse as ‘He became flesh’ with ‘He’ referring to what they understand
as ‘Christ Jesus’ (not ‘Jesus Christ’? – whatever different senses they are) who was called the Son of

269
God, and now, for them, has become ‘God’ – whatever the word means.] [Cf. To check Hebrew word
bsr – in noun form ‘flesh’, in verb form ‘good-news’] [Yeshua as the Incarnate Logos is the agent of
God’s new creation – Col 1:16-17.]

became ░░ (egeneto aor. mid.) (thematically v. 14 precedes vv. 10-13); /> had come to be – ARJ; />
came to be – ARJ; /became; /was made – KJV; /arrived on the scene as; [/became – into someone
else’s world, transition (www.moodypresent.mbn.org)] (cf. egenēthē aor pass 1Co 1:30 He
became our wisdom). [Note different nuance btw ‘came to be’ and ‘became’ or ‘made himself
become’ (Cf. Ko. 둔갑하다. ? 遁甲) – a god became man.]

as flesh ░░ [‘flesh’ here does not mean 'a human being', nor God-man or dem-god. Cf. 1Jn
4:3 those deny Yeshua having come in flesh (e.g. by virgin birth) are ‘antichrists’] (not ‘God
become a human being’) [It is 'flesh' of Yeshua as in Jn 6:48 - 58 ‘flesh’ – Bread of Life –
Manna from the heaven. [Not God walking on earth disguising as man (as in mythologies and
legends) or ‘playing at being human’. Not God became flesh. Not ‘God’ became a man, a
human, or human’, or ‘took (up) a body’ (cf. Heb 4:15), or ‘dwelled/abide in flesh’, but taking
up of human nature in its totality: true body, soul, spirit, without ceasing to be the Word or
divesting His divine nature. Being a person, the term ‘God-Man’ is a pagan religious jargon.
Upon death and resurrection of Yeshua, his human nature was not discarded, but carried with
Him and incorporated into His divine nature.];

[Unrelated to 1Ti 3:16, in which the phrase ‘in flesh’ (en carne in Latin), a common biblical
expression for Yeshua’s humanity.]

/x: ‘道成肉身’ for ‘incarnation of Logos’ (1:14) – (here, 도 道 is not an accurate translation –
see EE 1:1. ‘Tao’ means ‘way’, not ‘word] Cf. Phi 2:8} (egeneto aor mid; became/was-made
– KJV; / arrived on the scene as ~) [became – into someone else’s world, transition,
www.moodypresent.mbn.org ] [To check how the John Ross translates it (as '도' in Hangul?) in
his Korean NT translation (1887) of 'the way' in Jn 14:6]

[Cf. the incarnate Logos = ‘Immanuel’ (God with us) in the person of Yeshua in Mt 1:14. Not
something of mystery. Yeshua was as the Logos Incarnate. x: myth of God Incarnate. Not ‘pre-
existent Son’ or ‘God the Son’. Not pagan ‘God-man’, nor ‘God became man’.] [Cf. 1Tm 3:16 – {/mss}
‘God revealed [in the person of Yeshua] in flesh-and-blood of human reality’; not ‘God became
flesh’. Cf. 1Jn 4:2-3; Phi 2:7-8; Cf. Rm 1:3 – about the historical fact of Yeshua coming in
reality of humanity (‘flesh’).]
[{Jan 8, 2009 LOGOS - TAO or HUA Re: [b-trans] Re: Literal vs Dynamic Equivalent}] (v. 14a taking on
thematically from 1:1c.)

270
*sarx – flesh part of animal/human; 'flesh-and-blood' ('flesh-and-body') i.e. figurative of mortal
human being; Ko. 육신 (cf. > 살 in Jn 6:51);

Also in Jn 6:51 ‘hē sarx mou’ ‘my flesh-and-body. Distinct from sōma (physical) body. SARX
and the English ‘flesh’ are used figuratively for which the English phrase ‘flesh-and-body’ may
be appropriate. Not same as the idiomatic phrase ‘flesh-and-blood’, which refers to the reality
of being human ‘humanity’ or 'being related as in a family.]

(Aside from very few occurrences in NT in the literal sense of 'soft part of the body', this is
used in figurative sense of 'humanity' 'human beingness'. Cf. Metaphorically in the expression
‘eat my flesh’ (Jn 6:51-53)

By itself it does not have a connotation of 'evilness' – after Augustinian doctrine of original sin.
In Pauline letters, the basing meaning should be same while it is used often in the setting of
'fallen-ness' to refer to 'humanity in fallen state'.) [flesh = humanity with its human nature in its
weakness and of limitation as of the creature; rather than in its sinfulness – having from the
first Adam become fallen into the condition of the present reality of sinfulness and mortality;
cf. ‘flesh’ in Paul’s writings deals specifically with that which has become fallen in Adam]

http://amg.gospelcom.net/amg/PPF/pg/ntlight/Default.asp
www.amginternational.org
http://amg.gospelcom.net/amg/
www.amgpublishers.com/

271
‘Yeshua as Creator’; Mashiah and Creation

• Genesis creation by Elohim with His Word: Jn 1:3 – the God's Word (is the agent
of creation by Elohim. ‘All things came into existence (> were made) by the Logos (not =
Jesus Christ)’ (Jn 1:1, 3). This Logos (the Word of God) is not Trinitarian ‘God the
Son’ ‘the Second Person of Trinity’, ‘eternal pre-existing Christ or Jesus’; nor it is ‘a
god’ (NWT Jn 1:1c).
• Yeshua as the creator (creation agent) of New Creation (‘founding of the world’, not
creation of the heavens and the earth Gen 1:1): Eph 1:4 (Cf. Eph 3:9 v.l. corrupt text),
Heb 1:2. Cf. Rev 3:14 – beginning of the [new] creation of Elohim.
"By the Son [the risen and exalted Lord Yeshua Mashiah] were all things in the heavens and
on the earth created (Col 1:16-18)." – not the heavens and the earth, which were created by
the Logos’

Jn 1:10-12 'He was in the world and the world was made through Him …' – masc. pronoun
here is the incarnate God's Word in 1:1-4 (not the 'light' 1:4-9 - neuter) which had become as
flesh (← 1:14).
1Co 8:6 one Lord, Yeshua Mashiah, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.
Col 1:16; 2:10. God made Jesus the HEAD of everything. That doesn't mean everyone is
obeying him. Jesus will reign until he puts all his enemies under his feet. See 1Co 15:24-27.
‘the risen Son (not eternal preexisting God the Son) has abolished all rules and authority and
power … the Son himself will be subjected to the One who has subjected all things to him that
Elohim bay be all in all.” That's why God knows all things are reconciled to God in him.
Cf. Eph 6:12. ‘… against the rulers, against the authorities, against the world-rulers of the
darkness [of this age], against the spirit forces of the evil operating in the heavenly realms”

[Ref. https://youtu.be/dWDN_Zp-xZk A case against preexistence]

‘Yeshua as Savior’

‘*Savior’ ‘Our Savior’ in conjunction with ‘Lord’ – agent of salvation by Elohim. Cf. *Redeemer
[Isa 44:6 ‘YHWH, the King of Israel and his (= Israel, not YHWH) redeemer, YHWS of Host.
Similar syntax in Isa 45:11]

• Yeshua is HIS salvation – Lk 2:30; 1:68-69; Act 5:32; 13:23. Cf. Savior of his body (Eph
5:30); Yeshua our Savior (2Ti 1:10; Tit 1:4; 3:6); a Savior, the Lord Yeshua Mashiah (Phi
3:20) [He is not ‘Savior God’. Cf. ‘Elohim our Savior’ – Tit 1:3; 2:10; 3:4.]
• Yeshua is His righteousness - 2Pe 1:1
• Yeshua is His glory (Tit 2:13); to appear in the * glory of His Father (Mt 16:27); He is
expression of Father’s glory (Heb 1:3).
• Eph 1:16 ‘Elohim of our Lord Yeshua Mashiah, the Father of glory’,

272
2Pe 1:1 righteousness of our Elohim and Savior – Yeshua Mashiah ░░
\en dikaiosunē tou theou hēmōn kai sōtēros – Iēsou Christou

ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν καὶ σωτῆρος – Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ:

in righteousness of-the God of-us and of-Savior – of-Yeshua Messiah

[It is ‘our God’, not ‘our savior’ (as in KJV).] [The arthrous ho theos is rendered
consistently as ‘Elohim’ in IRENT, other than in, vocative, my/our/their Elohim, some
genitive, etc.]

[two genitive phrases ‘of Elohim’ and ‘of Savior Yeshua Mashiah’ construed to the single
theme ‘righteousness’ – thus ‘righteous of Elohim’ is ‘righteousness of Savior Yeshua
Mashiah’, as Yeshua is God’s righteousness. Again, this position is divergent from a
Trinitarian reading of the text, which tries to read as ‘our God and Savior = Jesus Christ’.
‘God’ is not here as a title for Yeshua as the Trinitarians take it from this text. IRENT
renders the arthrous ho theos consistently as ‘Elohim’ when it refers to ‘YHWH Elohim’.]
Various translations of this verse:

/Ko. 우리 하나님과 구주 예수 그리스도의 의 ( 義 ) (syntax is clearer in

Korean/Japanese language, as ‘righteousness’ is of Elohim and His Son); /of our
God and of our Deliverer Yeshua the Messiah – JNT; /of-the God of-us
and of-Savior Jesus Christ – KIT

1 (‘our God’ and ‘Yeshua, our Savior): /of the [true] God of us, yes, Savior –
Yeshua the Messiah – ARJ; /> of our God, and the Saviour, Jesus Christ –
CLV; 1-b (ambiguous): /x: of our God and [the] Savior Jesus Christ – NWT (-
the definite article is not needed; should have had ‘of’ inserted); /of our
God and Savior Jesus Christ – ALT, ESV, HCSB, GNB, AMP, Mft;
1-c (‘our God’ construed to Yeshua - Trinitarian): /of our God and Savior, Jesus
Christ – NET, NASB, GW;
2 (x: ‘our Savior. It is ‘of our God’, not ‘our Savior’): /xx: of God and our Savior
Jesus Christ – KJV+;
/xxx: shown forth by Jesus Christ, by him who is our God and our Saviour
– Cassirer; /xxxx: of Jesus Christ, our God and Savior – NLT!;

273
 Tit 2:13 waiting for the blessed hope, that is, appearing of the glory of great Elohim
and (appearing of) our Savior Mashiah Yeshua ░░
prosdechomenoi tēn makarian elpida kai epiphaneian)
waiting the blessed hope, that is, appearing
(tēs doxēs) tou megalou theou
of the glory of the great god
kai
and
sōtēros hēmōn Iēsou Christou;
of our Savior Yeshua Mashiah

[Cf. Yeshua, who is the glory of the Father.] [Cf. Phi 2:11 ‘Yeshua Mashiah is Lord, to
the glory of God the Father’]

[Note, here it is a rare example of arthrous theosa with remote definite article.]

A principled translation totally devoid of ambiguity, contradiction, confusion, and

contention should consider not just man-made grammatical rules, but the text in whole
context not just of the sentence in question but and paragraphs and sections in order to
see the relation btw theos and sōtēr, the latter being equally applicable to the God and to
Yeshua. Note: Some confuses by taking both 'the great God' and 'our Savior’ refer to
Father in this verse.

The text does not say ‘appearing of the great Elohim’, but ‘appearing of Father’s glory,
the glory which IS thematically no other than Mashiah Yeshua.

Proper reading/interpretation/translation should not be chained by the controversial

‘Granville Sharp′s Rule’ of biblical Greek grammar, esp. pertinent to Tit 2:13 and 2Pe
1:1 – the rule which has a bearing on argument of the Trinitarian doctrine.

[The presence of a definite article here in the text is not to serve for the purpose to comply
with such a grammatical rule, but simply for specification of the noun in the text. Not a
generic God-being, but the very God, that is, Elohim the Creator.]
[Then, the whole v. 13 tells that the appearing of the great Elohim is only realized as the
appearing of His Son to us, the creation – contrary to the idea of static tri-person Trinity
(e.g. have three ‘persons’), but dynamic relational triunity btw Father and Son, bound
in the divine Spirit, Spirit of love – to relate with the creation and humanity.]

Elohim, the Creator Logos of Elohim

The Spirit of Elohim
(> ‘God’)
(‘Holy Spirit’)
YHWH (‘Yahuah’) Yeshua

a
the definite article is separated from the noun theos by an interposed adjectival word. Only a few examples
for theos in GNT. IRENT renders arthrous ho theos (‘the God’) consistently as Elohim; here it is rendered
as 'the ~~ Elohim' retaining the article. [See in <Walk through the Scripture #1 - Words, Words and Words>
274
 1Tm 1:1 [kat’ epipagēn theou sōtēros hēmōn kai Chritou Iēsou tēs elpidos hēmōn]
(as directed from God our Savior, and (/even/yes) from Mashiah Yeshua our hope)

Compare other examples of Elohim (the God) and Yeshua in the same clause:
• 1Pe 1:3 [eulogētos ho theos kai patēr tou kuriou hēmōn Iēsou Chistou,]
(Praised be Elohim, the Father of our Lord Yeshua Mashiah) (x: the God and Father)
- hendiadys (apposition)
• 1Tm 1:2 [apo theou patros kai Christou Iēsou tou kuriou hēmōn]
(from God the Father and Mashiah Yeshua our Lord’
• 2Pe 1:2 [en epignōsei tou theou kai Iēsou tou kuriou hēmōn]
(the knowledge of Elohim and of-Yeshua the Lord of us);

Compare the examples of a single referent to Yeshua Mashiah:

• 2Pe 1:11 [eis tēn aiōnion basileian tou kuriou hēmōn kai Sōtēros Iēsou Christou]
(the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior – Yeshua Mashiah); (also 3:18)
• 2Pe 2:20 [en epignōsei tou kuriou kai sōtēros Iēsou Christou]
(the knowledge of the Lord {of us} and Savior, Yeshua Mashiah);
• 2Pe 3:2 [entolēs tou kuriou kai sōtēros]
(the commandment of the Lord and Savior);

Other titles for Yeshua

He was addressed as ‘Teacher’ (didaskalos Mt 8:19 - /x: Master – KJV, DRB, Bishops);
‘Rabbi’ (Mk 11:21); ‘Chief’, ‘Sir!’ ‘Master’ (kurie; kurios – cf. not ‘Lord’ in IRENT), ‘Chief’ epistatēs Lk
8:24 (/Master – most; /x: instructor - NWT)
Addressing others ‘friend’ (philos)

The Apostle and Kohen Gadol (> High Priest) – in Heb 3:2; 7:5ff (See *Kohen)

‘Believe Jesus’; ‘believe in Jesus’

[What does in mean to 'believe' (someone or something)?]

The phrase ‘believe Jesus’ as such is not found in the Bible, but there are quite a few equivalent expressions
in different phrases – majority in Johannine writings:

Jn 1:12 ‘believe in his name;

Jn 3:16, 18; 6:40; 1Pe 1:8 ‘believe in Him’;
Jn 3:36 ‘believe in the Son’ – ‘the Son’ not ‘God the Son’;
Jn 7:38; 11:25-26 ‘believe in me’;
Jn 6:35; 8:24 ‘belive I am he’;
Jn 3:18 ‘have not believed in the name of the one-and-only son of Elohim;
1Jn 5:5 ‘believes that Yeshua is the son of Elohim’;
1Jn 5:13 ‘belive in the name of the son of Elohim’;
Jn 20:29 ‘… believe that Yeshua is the very Mashiah, the son of Elohim’;
Act 16:31 ‘believe in the Lord Yeshua’;

[The core of ‘to believe in Yeshua’ is not to be ‘saved’ or ‘born again’, not to believe him to be ‘God’, but
to believe him to be the only Way to Father (Jn 14:6) to abide ‘in Elohim’ (1Jn 4:15, 16) to be
275
delighted/rejoicing in Him = to love Father (Mk 12:30 //Mt 22:37; //Lk 10:27). How is it possible? Only by
partaking the death on His cross he died in my place, every day (Lk 9:23), to have him live in my place (Gal
2:20).]

Cf. Believing as “Jesus = God”. www.angelsghosts.com/jesus-religion

“in Christ” (in the Mashiah)

John Noē (2008), Shattering the Left Behind Delusion. (pp. 107-8)

Being "in Christ" [a typical Pauline expression] requires being:

• Co-crucified (Rm 6:5-6; Gal 2:20). A sacrificial surrender of oneself to Christ
for the forgiveness of sins.
• Co-buried (Rm 6:4; Col 2: 12). Dying to sin, buried with him in baptism, and
repentance.
• Co-resurrected (Rm 6:4-5; Col 2:12-13; Eph 2:1-5; Rm 11: 15). Born again
by the Spirit of God, raised out of baptism alive in one's spirit in the Presence
of God, and walking in newness of life with the miraculous and great power
of resurrection inside us.
• Co-ascended (Eph 2:6; Col 3: 1). Trusting in him to lead one's life, being
obedient to his Word and seeking those things that are above-his kingdom, his
righteousness (Mt 6:33).
• Co-seated (Eph 2:6-7; 1:18-23; Col 3:1-3; Rev 3:21; 2:26-27). The high level
of being co-seated on his throne and demonstrated by reigning and ruling with
him here on earth.

276
Yeshua vs His Father – equal, same, identical?
• ‘Father’ cannot be in identity and ontology = ‘Son’
• Jn 5:18 stand equal ░░ [being equal (in some aspects) does not mean to be same
or identical. The phrase does not mean Yeshua was claiming ‘I am God’.]
• Jn 10:30 – ‘Father and Son are as one’ –
• Jn 14:28 – “Father is greater than I”
• Phi 2:6 – ‘equal to what God is’ [not equal to Elohim]

YHWH and Yeshua relation

(that is, so-called Christology)
1. YHWH’s only brought forth Son; Elohim as His Father
2. The Mashiah of YHWH – Kohen HaGadol
3. The Mystery of Elohim. The Mashiah = the truth Elohim has kept hidden until
He had revealed.
Eph 3:4; Col 4:3, ‘the mystery, that is, the Mashiah’ (taken as appositive; not ‘mystery the Mashiah
has kept hidden).
Rm 16:25.
Co 1:27 ‘mystery among the nations, which is the Messiah in you’
Col 2:2 mystery of Elohim and Father, yes, the Mashiah (taking kai as appositive ‘mystery = the
Mashiah’)
[Cf. Eph 5:32 – ‘mystery concerning the Mashiah and the Mashiah Community’.]
4. equal; one, not same – receiving praise and honor (worship) not as separate
persons but one. Putting faith in Yeshua is same as putting faith in YHWH [Jn
12:44 ‘the one who believes in me, believes not [so much] in me, but [rather]
in the very One who has sent me’. See its translation problem in EE here.27 (Cf.
Jn 14:1, 6)]
5. The Logos [of Elohim]; * Incarnate Word of YHWH; not 'God Incarnate'
'Incarnate God [the Son]'.
6. Immanuel – Elohim present with His people in the person of Yeshua [Mt 1:23]
7. Fullness of God-being in the Mashiah
8. The Mashiah was sent to fulfil the Torah in Himself, not in a new carved in
stone tablets.
9. Pesach Lamb of Elohim
10. First fruit of Resurrection, power of Elohim
11. In the spirit of Elohim; Sending the spirit of Elohim to give to the Mashiah-
followers to quicken their spirit to lead Life in the Spirit – fruit of the Spirit
working in them. (Gal 5:22)
12. Love – Jn 3:35; 10:17 [‘the Father loves the Son’]; ‘Loving’ is what links and
unites Father and Son. Out of their love flows the holy Spirit – God’s spirit which
is not a thing, a person, a ‘spiritual’ being, a concept, a force. Nor it is the ‘Ghost’
(after KJV rendering), which comprise the third God (‘God the Holy Spirit’) in
the Trinitarian doctrine. Father and Son are not in stative relative hierarchy of
power and position, but in dynamic relationality of Love. Immanent triune
dynamic relationality by itself will exist only divine and human dynamic

277
 relationalitya .

Relation of Father and Son is depicted in a vertical display (not in the sense of
‘hierarchy’:

Father is at the top and Son is next, because Creation (epitomized by ‘man’) comes
below it.

Father
↑↓
Son
↑↓
Man

The connecting lines are what the holy spirit is, with the expression ‘holy’ meaning
‘belongs to divine relation’ – as power in act of creation work from His love by
Elohim.

a
Divine and human relationality (p. 1
http://ism.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/The%20Trinitarian%20DNA%20of%20Christian%20Worsh
ip.pdf
278
*Crucifixion, suffering, and ‘death of Jesus’
Yeshua died as the Mashiah of Elohim, ‘the one-and-only son of Elohim’ (Jn 1:18; 3:16, 18) – ‘for our sins’
(1Co 15:3; Gal 1:4) as ‘our Pesach sacrifice’ (1Co 5:7) – the ‘Lamb of Elohim’ (Jn 1:29, 36) – on the Pesach
day Abib 14, ‘at the God’s appointed time in behalf of the ungodly’ (Rm 5:6). His burial by entombment,
not by ‘burying’ in a grave. [See on ‘Passover-Passion Week’ in IRENT Vol. III Supplement – Collections -
WB #6 Passion Week Chronology.]

Suffering and death; ‘cup’:

Rm 5:1-11;
Lk 22:39-46;
How did Yeshua face the death to come upon Him? (not ‘face to His death’, as if a theological topic).
What does ‘cup’ (vessel) in His Gethsemane prayer mean?
cup of His suffering (on the cross)? [Cf. theme of the movie ‘The Passion of the Christ’ by Mel Gibson]
cup as God’s wrath [Ps 11:6; 75:7-8; Is 51:17, 19, 22; Jer 25:15-16; 49:12; 51:57; Ezk 23:31-34]
‘remove the cup from me’ – does it mean that he would like to avoid dying, like many who face death?
Was it his will – he did not want to die?
Lk 22:43-44 v.l.: - intensity of His feelings and condition, but for fear of his approaching death?

What and how does His death accomplish? www.desiringgod.org/articles/five-truths-about-the-death-of-

jesus

1. for God’s adversaries, sinners – Rm 5:7-8;

2. for people to purchase – Jn 6:36, 39;
3. for our behalf – 1Pe 2:24;
4. it defines God’s love – 1Jn 3:16;
5. reconciles humanity to God – Col 1:21-22;
substitutionary atonement – Heb 9:22; Does his death ‘save’ us? How so? Is it His death as such, or his
death is a means of saving?

www.cbn.com/community/booklets/Passion/ThePassionProphecyFulfilled.pdf
http://dlibrary.acu.edu.au/staffhome/gehall/xtology4.htm
Physical death of Jesus Christ www.godandscience.org/apologetics/deathjesus.pdf

www.thenazareneway.com/details_history_of_crucifixion.htm

Crucifixion – a most painful, gruesome, disgraceful and dreaded method of execution. The custom
was prob. originated from the ancient Persia; brought back by the Alexander the Great and later
adopted by the Romans. It was for punishment of criminals and was not something carried out from
ritual or symbolic reasons, as distorted by some having practiced a non-lethal imitation form of it in
modern times.

Bound by ropes and/or nailing on the execution stake. Mostly a simple upright beam (Latin stapes),
Occasionally the condemned one carried to a public display of shame a separate horizontal beam
(Latin patibulum) on his back to the site of execution, where upright beams were already set up on
the ground. With both arms outstretched and bound on the patibulum, nailing of the hands was
through the space between the distal ends of two bones, radius and ulna; not through the palms as
often misunderstood. With one foot on top of the other sideway, nailing was through the ankles.
When It would be T-shape when put on the top of the stapes; it is a familiar t shape of a cross when
put on a few feet below the top, which became a graphic symbol of His crucifixion from earliest
days in the history of Christianity.

279
‘God has a son’? ‘only begotten’? – 'a son of God' vs 'the Son of God' < 'the son of Elohim'.

[What does it mean that someone IS a son? [See on the fundamental linguistic and literary problem of
the word ‘IS’ – See the file ‘The nefarious IS’ in the Collections #1 for the Supplement III of IRENT.

If A is not B, that A is B is acceptable only (1) if the predicate is in ellipsis and understood, and (2) it
is meant to say ‘A is as B’. Animals are not man, but we can say ‘animals are as man’, though the
statement need to go on for further elaboration.

Does it make any sense to say God has a son, aside from mythological gods? Linguistically at least,
the Muslim’s sensitivity is quite understandable when they ask how God can have a son.

When we say ‘God is Father’, it does not mean at all God is like a biological father in a family and
has a son even if the son is only. Elohim the Most-High relates to us as Father – as His Mashiah has
revealed to us; not that He is Father.

‘Son of God’ does not mean that a son was born (‘begotten’ ‘generated’) of God. [See elsewhere in
this file that ‘God is not a person’ ‘Elohim is not a God’] Even if the son is said to be ‘only one’, it is
correct to say that “God does not have a son” or “God is not a father”. [See elsewhere also in BW #3
for ‘Does God have a Son?’] Various literary devices such as personification, figure of speech, and
rhetoric expression, or anthropomorphism are seen employed in the Scripture. This forces the
translators to deal with difficulties for trans-cultural and trans-linguistic transfer.a

Mt 5: 9 sons of God ░░ (huoi theou - anarthrous) /God's sons; [The phrase ‘son(s) of~’ is a Hebraic idiom
to describe such character as befitting and belonging to ~. Cf. English word – ‘qua’ in the
character/capacity/role of; /하나님의 아들들이 되게되는것이 아니라 하나님의 아들됨이 드러나는
것.]
[cf. Mt 27:54 //Mk 15:39 ‘a god’s son’ (vs. //Lk 23:47 – ‘a righteous one’)]; /sons of God – most, NWT;
/x: children of – KJV, TNIV – totally different concept.
Cf. ‘the son of Elohim’ (>> the Son of God’), a title for the Mashiah in NT.
Gk. S3439 monogenēs (adj.) – See Appendix for Jn 1.8 monogenēs theos

1. monos (sole, single; only; alone, by themselves)

2. ginomai (cause to be; generate; become) [not gennaō]

rendering monogenēs as ‘the only-begotten Son’ may be retained, albeit archaic religious biblical
jargon. ['only brought forth' – too verbose for a suitable translation word.]

The word has been variously translated. /only - ESV, WNT, GNB, BBE, CEV, ERV; /one and
only – NET, LEB; /xxx: unique - ISV’; /only begotten – KJV, DRB, EMTV, Geneva, Bishops;
/only-begotten’ – NWT, Webster, Darby, MKJV; /only brought-forth – ISR; /xx: only born – ABP;
(1) ‘only begotten’ – (KJV). The verb ‘beget’b is a typical KJV English; The phrase ‘only
begotten’ is an anachronistic biblical jargon. What does it mean to say God fathers someone in

a
It is one of issues which confront translation work of the Scripture into Arabic, in addition to use
of the Arabic word ‘Allah’ for ‘God’.
b
‘be begotten’ (from Gk ginomai) (as from male principle, in contrast to ‘be born’ as from female principle).
Not to be confused with a similar verb gennaō. The related verb is consistently rendered in IRENT
as ‘bring forth’ instead of ‘beget’. E.g. Jn 3:9; 1Jn 4:9; 5:1, 18; Act 13:33; 1Co 4:15; Phm 1:10;
Heb 1:5; 5:5; Rev 1:5. In Mt 1:2ff (/x: became father to – NWT; /x: was the father of). [Cf.
anagennaō 1Pe 1:3 – regenerate; /x: born again]
280
 the divine realm, even with ‘Trinity God’? It is an example par excellence of anthromorphism a,
which may suffice much inadequate Trinitarian idea of what and who God is. The word
‘begetting’ brings up an imagery similar to mythological gods which are generated from a
supreme god from a goddess. [Identifying the Logos ('the Word of Elohim') as ‘a god’ (that is,
a mighty God below the Almighty God, Jehovah) in Jn 1:1c in NWT is similar to this.]
(2) ‘only’ – treated same as the word monos, not much different from ‘one and only’ –
(emphatically only one?). It may be quite acceptable as a translation word when it means no
more than ‘one and only’ child in a family – e.g. Used substantively Lk 7:12 (a son); Lk 8:42 (a
daughter); 9: 38 (a son), Heb 11:17 (the only son – Isaac). Not adequate for the dynamic
relationship (not just ‘unity’) the Son, the Word of Elohim, and the Father, Elohim the Most-
High.
(3) /xx: ‘unique’; /xxx: uniquely born; /xx: uniquely begotten – (Is it something of uniqueness
of the Son? What nuance of ‘unique’ in Father and Son relationality?).
(4) ‘only-begotten' (one)’ – referring to Yeshua being the son of Elohim. 'only brought-forth'
(Cf. ‘born’, ‘begotten’, ‘generated’) It resonates with the phrase ‘sent forth one’ into the world
(Jn 3:17). Hardly can be found an idea of ‘adoption’ (human legalistic concept) to put on Elohim-
Yeshua relation of meeting divinity and humanity. However, as a translation word it is too
verbose.
• Jn 1:18 v.l. ‘the only-begotten Son’ [See further on the issue of textual variants: ‘the
only begotten Son – KJV; vs. ‘the only begotten god’ - NWT]
• Jn 3:16 ‘His only-begotten son’ (‘his only begotten Son’ – KJV)
• Jn 3:18 ‘the only-begotten son of Elohim);
• 1Jn 4:9 ‘His only-begotten Son).
• [Also anarthrous example Jn 1:14 (‘a father’s only-begotten son)]

‘is begotten’ (KJV) in reference to Yeshua:

Act 13:33; Heb_5:5 (cf. 1:4) son I have begotten today

Jn 1:14 the only begotten of the Father,
Jn 1:18 the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father,
Jn 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son,
Jn 3:18 not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
(Cf. Isaac for Abraham - Heb_11:17)

Act 13:33 have brought you forth ░░ /have revealed me to be father to you – ARJ; /have
declared to be father to you – ARJ; /have declared your sonship - S. H. Bess (- vide infra for PDF)
(=Heb 1:5; 5:5 from Ps 2:7)[‘declaring who He is – the Son of God’, not ‘making/adopting Him as a
son’ – same issue with the phrase ‘God′s Son’ υἱοῦ θεοῦ (both anarthrous) in Mk 1:1 v.l.]; /have
fathered - NET; /have begotten – ALT, NASB, ESV, REB, KJV+, NKJV, NAB; /??: have become
your Father – Cass, HCSB, NWT, JNT, NIV trio, GW, CEV, ISV, Mft, NLT, WNT, AUV, TNT;
/have brought you forth – ISR; /?: have given you being – BBE; /?: My Son! My very own Son!
Today I celebrate you! – MSG!; /[REC fn: His second birth at resurrection ]; [QQ Christological
concern – at resurrection (Rm 1:4), rather than at incarnation (Lk 1:32). What was the context in
Psalm?]
[ http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/Ted_Hildebrandt/OTeSources/23a-Prophets/Text/Articles/Bess-
SonOfGod-GTJ.pdf
p. 22 ‘I have declared thy sonship’. The word translated as ‘begotten’ does not refer to generation. As
a translation word in reference to Yeshua, it brings unintended sense of ‘being-born – akin to

a
Anthromorphism – to make God easy to put into one’s theological frame of mind, ‘God which human can
understand’. There is a danger of slippery slope into images of a God of three-faced head; a God of
three-headed person - from three Gods for one ‘Godhead’; and finally, into believing ‘God whose
name is Jesus’, and even ‘Jesus = Yahweh’.
281
biological. Hence the un-biblical concepts of ‘God the Son’, ‘His Son became man’, ‘God-man’, etc.
(Act 13:33-34 refers it not to the incarnation, but to the resurrection of Christ.)]

www.crosswalk.com/faith/bible-study/why-john-3-16-must-be-more-than-a-slogan.html
“… This intentional plan was the way God chose to love the world. To let His Son become a
man and die on the cross as an atoning sacrifice for all human sin. Jesus carried in His body the
sin of every human who ever had or would live, so all who believe in Him could receive
forgiveness, mercy and redemption …]

Yeshua was with his people as the son of Elohim. Not ‘God the Son’ became a man Jesus.

‘Counterfeit Jesus'

• 'born of a virgin' with no human father, making him not from the seed of
David to be Mashiah.
• The pre-existent eternal God the Son who came into the womb of 'Mary' – as a
demigod or god-man, who died and rose and came back as God Jesus which is
after manner of re-incarnation.
• Not a 'Jew', outside Judaism.
• Make Torah irrelevant; replacing the YHWH's covenant with his 'new'
Covenant.
• December 25 (winter solstice) was the date of the Roman festivity for Natalis
Solis Invincti, “Birthday of the Invincible Sun God [Mithras]", which
supplanted Saturnalia, the festival dedicated to Roman god Saturn (Dec 17-23
in Julian)]. It was adopted as the day of Catholic Mass for Birth day of Christ
by the Catholic church in the 4th c. C.E.
• Worshiped as 'Jesus was as God' taken over as the day of Christ Mass in
Catholic., but then turned into 'Jesus is God' with 'Jehovah' being also God –
to come up with two God-beings/person, to have the Holy Ghost to make
three Gods/Person.
• Name invoked in 'worshiptainment' (with elaborate instrumental music) for
gospel of prosperity and purpose and possibility.

282
 PART III. Appendix

Kurios in the Hebrew Gospel of Matthews

Quoted from Ch. 1 Introduction of

Richard Brown and Christopher J. Samuel (2003 draft), The meanings of κυριος in the
New Testament, (? _www.SIL.org )

1.1 The Problem: In the New Testament (NT) the three most common messianic
titles for Jesus are ο χριστος [o christos] “the Christ”, ο κυριος [o kurios] “the
Lord”, and ο κυριος ημων [o kurios êmôn] “our Lord”. The most common terms
of reference for God the Father are ο θεος [ho theos] “the God”, ο πατηρ [ho
patêr ] “the Father”, and κυριος [kurios] “LORD”. This latter is used as the divine
name, corresponding to YHWH in the Old Testament (OT). [Note: arthrous ho
kurios for Jesus vs. anarthrous kurios for YHWH.]
…
1.6. Early translation of kurios: As noted previously, several early church fathers
say that Matthew first wrote his Gospel in Hebrew, and several wrote that they
had seen it. Rabbis also wrote of at least one Hebrew Gospel and noted that it
included the divine name. Today there survive versions of Matthew in Hebrew
which have ancient roots, although their relationship to the original Matthew
remains undetermined. (See Howard 1995.)

Most notable is the version preserved in the polemical writings of Rabbi Shem-
Tov. This version uses the abbreviation ‫ ה״‬for ‫ השם‬hashshem ‘the name’ to avoid
writing the sacred name. Since the Shem-Tov Matthew was transmitted by
Rabbis, and they were forbidden to write the sacred name in heretical books, it is
evident that this version once had the divine name YHWH. Howard (1995) has
demonstrated that the original form (vorlage) of this version cannot be later than
the fifth century and is probably much earlier.

The Shem-Tov version (hereafter HebST ) marks the divine name everywhere that
the Greek does, except that it omits the divine name completely in 1:20 and 2:15,
but with no loss of meaning. Where the sense is that of ‘owner’, HebST has ba‘al
‘owner’, as in 9:38 (where the referent is YHWH); 20:8; 21:40. References to
Jesus as Lord use forms of hâ’âdôn, adônî, adonênû.

The du Tillet version of Matthew ‘HebdT’ is clearly related to the Shem-Tov

version; it has either suffered less corruption through the centuries or has been
revised to match the Greek or Latin versions of Matthew. The Franz Delitzsch
‘HebD’ and Salkinson-Ginsburg ‘HebSG’ versions are the standard Hebrew NT’s
in Classical Hebrew and were translated a century or more ago. In 1976 the
United Bible Societies produced a version of the New Testament in Modern

283
 Hebrew, which we will call ‘HebBS’. In all of these Hebrew translations, as in the
OT (Ps. 110:1; Mal. 3:1), hâ’âdôn ‘the Lord/master’, adonênû ‘our Lord/master’
and adonî ‘my Lord/master’ are the usual titles for Jesus, while YHWH is the
divine name. In a few places one or more of these translations use adonây,
usually to allow ambiguity where the translators were unsure of the original
intent. The Modern Hebrew translation uses plain adôn for ‘Sir’.

'*Son of God' vs. '*God the Son' vs. ‘the son of Elohim’

Concept of son and father; sonship.

Father is because of a son; son is because of father. Father as to Elohim is a special relational word used
in the Bible. Not that God has a son in a literal biological sense, as Muslim misunderstand.

'Son' is a son because he has beginning from a father. 'Son' is not 'son' if it has no beginning. It is simply
a contrived fictional theological idea in Trinitarian argument, simply a term for a God-being of a tritheism
who is being worshiped along with 'Father' and 'Holy Ghost'. The unbiblical expression 'God the Son'
(which sits alongside 'God the Father' a and 'God the Holy Spirit' b ) is a creation of the nonbiblical
Trinitarianism.

The common Hebrew idiom ‘*son of something/someone’ means ‘one is as someone (or something)
taking on its characters.

*the son of Elohim; 'the Son of God' vs. 'God the Son'
(See 'the son-of-man' 'the Son of Man')

Note: 'father' and 'son' are used in figurative speech unless it is of biological relation. Thus, Muslim
objection about 'son of God' is from linguistic and literary misunderstanding. Same kind of
misunderstanding pervades in Christian concept of God the Father and the son of Elohim. Here 'father'
is a figurative word, emphasizing relationship, while 'son' is in the literal sense (i.e. human being, a
man, not God-man or demigod), not 'son' of a god as in Hellenic polytheistic pantheon.

the son of Elohim ░░ (ho huios tou theou); /> the Son of God – most; [IRENT does not capitalize
the word ‘son’ is this phrase, in order to remove a wrong connotation of ‘God the Son’.

Yeshua became believed as the son of Elohim (> the Son of the God >> the son of God)
[Mt 3:17; Mk 1:11; 9:7; Lk 9:35]. Cf. Immersion with spirit - by Yohanan the immerser –
'beloved (son)' – [See * immersion, * baptism]

(1) Adam [in the Genesis] as the son of Elohim – Lk 3:38.

(2) Figuratively applied to Israel (Exo 4:22). "… Thus says YHWH, Israel is my son, my firstborn
son"
(3) As a title for Yeshua. (Mt 26:63; Mk 3:11; Lk 4:41; 22:70; Jn 1:34, 50; 5:25; 11:4, 27; 20:31; Act
8:37 v.l.; 9:20; 1Jn 3:8; 4:15; 5:5, 10, 12, 13, 20; Eph 4:13; Heb 4:14; 6:6; 7:3; 10:29; 2Co 1:19;
Gal 2:20; Rev 2:18; etc.)
Cf. 'the only-begotten son of Elohim Jn 3:18

a
'God the Father' for Gk. theos pater [rendered in IRENT as 'Elohim the Father']
b
'God the Holy Spirit' ('God the Holy Ghost' in KJV) – no Greek phrase in the NT. It should be understood
as 'Elohim as the holy sprit' [Cf. 'Elohim is spirit' Jn 4:24] [Cf. 'the Spirit' as in Act 2:4 is none other than
this 'Elohim as the holy spirit', not thirst Person/God of the tritheistic Trinitarian statement.]
284
 Cf. ‘Son of the Most-High’ (Lk 1:32).] [A title for Yeshua from his conception (Lk 1:32, 35).]
[used as self-designation by Yeshua in Jn 11:4]; = the only-begotten son of Elohim [‘Elohim’ and ‘son
of Elohim’ are equal what they are and they do, but not identical as to who they are. Jn 5:18. It
does NOT imply notion of deity.] [Not to be confused with the unbiblical jargon ‘God the Son’
of the second Person of the so-called Triune God.]; /xx: the eternal Son of God; /xxx: the pre-
existent Jesus before his myth of virgin birth ('pre-human Jesus'). [The phrase ‘the son of Elohim’
as a title applied to Yeshua Mashiah is not something for him before his birth and his baptism,
nor it is a description for his alleged 'deity'.]

Cf. 'the only-begotten son of Elohim Jn 3:18

Cf. a son of Elohim; son of God; (Mt 4:3, 6; 8:29; 14:33; 27:40; Lk 4:3, 10; 8:28; Mk 5:7; 15:39;
Jn 10:34; Rm 1:4); God’s son – Mk 1:1; Lk 1:35;
Cf. Mk 1:1 v.l. ‘son of Elohim’ huiou {tou} theou’
Cf. Mk 5:7; Lk 8:28 ‘son of Elohim the Most-High’ huie tou theou tou hupsistou
Cf. the son of the Blessed One – Mk 14:61;

Cf. 'God the Son' – (http://rscottclark.org/2014/10/definition-of-chalcedon/ ) for 'God Jesus'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_the_Son

A non-biblical unbiblical church jargon used by the Trinitarians. Athanasian Creed – 'theos ho huios'
in Gk.; Cf. deus filius in Latin phrase means 'Son (is) God'

[Cf. Hebrew idiom of ‘son of someone/something’ – taking on characters or in special relation.]

‘my son’ (of Elohim) (2Sam 7:14, Psa 2:7),

‘sons of Elohim’ (Job 2:1)
‘sons of Elohim’ (Gen 6:2ff) – [does not refer to angels – they are ‘spirits’; not flesh (‘human’);
do not marry; do not copulate or breed. www.cogwriter.com/angels-marry-women.htm ]
"a son of gods" – Dan 3:25 [Cf. Dan 7:13 "like a son of man"]

‘God’s children’ (children of God) (tekna theou) – Jn 1:12; Phi 2:15; 1Jn 3:2;
‘the children of Elohim’ – Jn 11:52; Rm 9:8; 1Jn 3:10; 5:2;
‘God’s sons’ (sons of God) (huoi theou) – Mt 5:9; Lk 20:36; Rm 8:14; Gal 3:26;
‘sons of the Most-High’ – Lk 6:35
Cf. ‘spiritual sons’;

[The phrase ‘the son of Elohim’ as a title applied to Yeshua Mashiah is not something for
him before his birth and his baptism, nor it is a description for his alleged 'deity'.]

Cf. Rm 1:4a tou horisthentos huiou theou en dunamei kata pneuma hagiōsunēs ex
anastaseōs nekrōn, Iēsou Christou tou kuriou hēmōn]

[‘son’ as an anthropomorphic term is used not in physical or biological sense but denotes a
special relationship. unrelated to grammatical gender. The meaning is simply 'son' as of man.
Cf. 'the son-of-man' [‘son of someone’, a Hebrew idiom – ‘son’ as a relational, not a
biological-social term. Yeshua’s unique relation to Elohim as the only brought-forth Son, not
one of many sons of God. Not unbiblical ‘God the Son’.]

Cf. Semi-Arian formula, ‘The Son was begotten by an act of the Father’s will.’

285
Sonship of Yeshua
* '*immersion' *baptism

The notion of 'son of God' 'God's son' 'son of Elohim' has nothing to do with a mythological
idea of God sires a human being (as in Hinduism), aka 'virgin birth' of god-man – conceived
with no sexual relation to a man. [In IRENT 'Elohim' is a translation word for Gk. ho theos
'the God', which most Bible translations simply renders as 'God'.]

• 'God's Son' (Lk 1:35);

• 'a son of Elohim' – Mt 4:3, 6; 8:29; 27:40; Mk 1:1; 5:7; Lk 4:3, 10; 8:29; Jn 10:36;
• As a title for Yeshua – 'the son of Elohim' (Mt 16:16; 26:64; Mt 3:11; Lk 4:41;
22:71; Jn 1:34, 50; 5:20; 11:4, 27; 20:31); [IRENT does not capitalize the word
‘son’ in the fixed phrase of ‘son of Elohim’ in order to avoid wrong connotation of
‘God the Son’ of the Trinity.]
• 'my son, the beloved (of Elohim)' (Mt 3:17 //Mk 1:11 //Lk 3:22. Mt 17:7 //Mk 9:7);
'my chosen son' (Lk 9:35) – it is at the immersion by Yohanan that Yeshua of
Nazareth, not 'Jesus the God-man', was declared to be the son of Elohim.
• "only-begotten son" (Jn 1:18) 'the only-begotten son' (Jn 3:16); 'the only-begotten
son of Elohim (Jn 3:18);

* 'only-begotten' monogenēs

The Greek word monogenēs S3439 used

(1) in the literal sense referring to an only child in the family in Lk 7:12; 8:42; 9:38;
Cf. Isaac to Abraham Heb 11:17 "his only one of whom it was said, <In Isaac your seed shall be
called>." [See Gen 22:2 'your only son who you love'. Isaac was the only son from Sarah; another
son, older, Ishmael from Hagar Gen 16:11.]
(2) in the figurative sense for Yeshua to Elohim (Jn 3:16, 18; 1Jn 4:9, 18).

[Examples of translation in Jn 3:16

/his only begotten Son – KJV, NASB
/his one and only Son – CSB, NIV, NET, WEB;
/his One and Only Son – HCSB;
/> his only Son – ESV, GW, Weymouth;
/his Son, The Only One – Aramaic in Plain English;
/His Son – the only begotten – YLT;
/x: his unique Son – ISV;
/'only Son brought-forth (from God)'- IRENT

A special case of 'sonship' is the notion that 'Elohim has sent the only-and-one Son of Him. This is
the common denominator to separate Christian religions from non-Christian religions of various
forms and models.

The traditional phrase 'only begotten Son' is somewhat archaic but may be kept as a translation word
in reference to Yeshua, the son of Elohim. It can be easily taken in the literal sense – in conjunction
with other terms such as 'God incarnate' 'Virgin Birth' 'God-man', etc., making the Almighty Elohim
as a supernatural magician.

← ek gennasthai ek theou (Jn 1:13, et. al.) → analogous to prōtotokos (Rm 8:29; Col 1:17, etc.) –
After BDAG.

286
Father (the Heavenly Father) and Son are not titles given to certain beings, but descriptives of
their unique relation (cf. human analogy; anthropomorphism). To say 'Father' in the various
Trinitarian statements without the agreed-upon definition is not much worthy of discussions
and debates.

Cf. a king, King, the king, the King. Here, the King has a son. The expression 'the son of the
King' reflects "as the king is king, his son is king" - in the sense that 'his son is as a king'
taking on Father's authority and power. (It cannot however be taken → "as the King is a king,
so is his son is a king.") – See a separate file, G-Jn Appendix <Jn 1.1 interpretation and
translation>.

In the case of the word 'God' – it is much more complicated [because of theological and
doctrinal presuppositions and entanglements].

The Son is embodiment of the Word of Elohim (Jn 1:14, not God, God the Son, pre-human
Jesus was put into the womb of Ever Virgin Mary and born as a God-man or demigod). At his
* baptism in spirit to be declared as 'the beloved Son' – a figurative expression – of Elohim,
who bestowed the divine authority on the Son (Jn 5:26)
*born; *begotten; generated; 'born again'

• to be born (out female principle) – e.g. Gal 4:4: exapesteilen ho theos ton huion auto
genomenon (> ginomai) ek gunaiko; Cf. Mt 11:11 //Lk 7:28 en gennētois gunaikōn
among those born of women (gennētos – n.)
• to be begotten (of male principle) – archaic English;

• begat (past tense) – archaic. E.g. Mt 1:2ff – ‘brought forth’ – ISR< IRENT; /x: was
father of – ERV, GW; /x: fathered – ISV; /x: became father to – NWT;
• monogenōs ‘only-begotten’ – KJV (archaic expression); ‘only one who was brought
forth’
[ho monogenēs huios ‘the only-begotten son’ (of Elohim) – Jn 1:18; 3:16].
• gennēthē anōthen ‘born afresh, anew, from above’ Jn 3:3; /x: born again – KJV (biblical
jargon). Cf. 1Pe 1:3, 23 anagennēsas /regenerate; /x: regenerate again – KJV;
• Cf. ‘firstborn’

287
 “*AGAIN” cf. '*born again'

S3825 pallin “again”.

Jn 3:3, 7, 31; 19:11; Jam 1:17; 3:15, 17.
Cf. deuteros (second time)

S509 anōthen (13x) – not “again”

(1) 'top'
apo anōthen Mt 27:51 //Mk 15:38 ('from top').
ek tōn anōthen: Jn 19:23 woven from the top.
(2) 'from above'
Jn 3:3 gennēthē anōthen 'born from above' /xx: born again;
Jn 3:31 He that comes from above:
Jn 19:11 given from above:
Jam 1:17 gift is from above.
Jam 3:17 the wisdom that is from above
(3) 'from beginning/start'
Act 26:5 knew from the beginning,
Lk 1:3 ('from its start');
(4) 'anew'
Gal 4:9 (palin anōthen 'again anew');

Word Study on MAN, *SOUL, BODY, FLESH, MIND, HEART

[See anthropology – in the file <Walk through the Scripture 3B - Man, Anthropology, and Religion>]

Ref. John Hick (1994), Death and Eternal Life, Ch. 2 What is Man? pp. 35-54.

*angel

IRENT renders S32 aggelos (176x) as (1) messenger (of Elohim), (2) angel, (3) agent

(1) [God's] messengers – Heb 3:1; 13:2; Rev 1:1, 20; 2:1, 8, 12, 18; 3:1, 7, 14; 5:2, 11; 7:1, 2, 11; 8:2, 3, 4,
5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 13; 9:1, 13, 14, 15, 10:1, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10; 11:1, 5; 14:6, 8, 9, 10, 15, 17, 18, 19; 15:1, 6, 7, 8;
16:1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 12, 17; 17:1, 7; 18:1, 21; 19:17; 20:1, 9, 12, 17; 22:6, 16;
(2) Angels
angels – Rev 5:11; 7:11
Michael and his angels – Rev 12:7

Archangel – 1Th 4:16;

Gabriel – Lk 1:19, 26
Michael the archangel – Jud 9;
Angel(s) of Adonai
Angels of the son-of-man – Mt 13:42; 24:31;
Angels of the kingdom reign of the heavens – Mt 13:39;
Angles of Elohim Mt 22:30; Lk 12:8, 9;
Angels in heavens – Mt 18:10; angel in the heavens – Mk 12:25;
Angels in heaven – Mt 13:32;
Angels of the heavens – Mt 24:36
The holy angels – Mt 25:31; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26;

288
 A holy angel – Act 10:22;
An angel from heaven – Lk 22:43;
God's angels – Heb 1:6;
A God's angel – Gal 4:14;
the angel – Act 12:8

(2-a) Fallen angels:

Jud 6 "angels confined in utter darkness bound in eternal chains"
2Pe 2:4 "angels in tartarus' (abyss)
1Pe 3:19 "the disobedient spirits in prison"

Cf. sons of God as fallen angels? – Gen 6:1-4;

Isa 14:1-15; 24:21-23;
To check: 1Enoc 6: - 12: (12:-16:); 6: -16: ; 2 Enoc 7:, 18:1-7; Jub 5:, 7:

(3) "agents of the devil" – Mt 25:41 Rev 19:20; 20:10];

"an agent of Satan" – 2Co 12:7; /xx: messenger – most, KJV; /xx: an angel of Satan – NWT;
Cf. Satan disguised into an angel of light – 2Co 11:4;

Countable vs. non-countable nouns; arthrous vs. anarthrous:

Noun used as countable or uncountable; use of indefinite article in English:

It is important to take notice of whether a noun is arthrous or not in Greek. [Note: there is no
grammatical articles in Latin.] How a noun is used in English as countable or uncountable, may
make its meaning and sense different. A noun can be used (in addition to as plural) with the, a
(an), no article or modifiers (adjectives).
No word should be translated simply based on what is supposedly correct in grammar. Grammar
is simply there for descriptive purpose, not proscriptive in everyday language. The same holds
true for translation work; grammars of the source language and the receptor language are there
for descriptive purpose to help understand the syntax and the meaning of the larger texts; it is
not there for translators are required to follow – in fact, they follow blindly.
• E.g. as elsewhere mentioned, the practice of translation by NWT of the anarthrous theos
in Jn 1:1c as ‘a god’. Analyze they did try correctly from something of grammatical
knowledge, but what they got is not right in understanding of how a word works in
language. It is an example of elementary ‘grammatical fallacy’. Indefinite article here tells
it is a member in a class, that is, the Word is one of many gods. Uncapitalized 'god' in
English convention tells the Word is something of a pagan deity.
• E.g. *Jn 4:24 ‘Elohim is [as] spirit’ (‘what spirit is, Elohim is’ or 'Elohim is spirit');
[The word 'spirit' here should not be capitalized; it should not be treated as a countable
noun with the indefinite article in English translation.]
/spirit – NET, ESV, NASB, HCSB, NIV; /Spirit – NKJV, ALT, ISR, Mft, AUV, MRC,
MSG (baloney); /xxx: a Spirit – NWT, KJV+, AMP; /xxx: a spirit – Wesley, Noyes;
/xxx: God is a spiritual being – Barclay; [ → 'God the spirit', i.e. the holy spirit'; not 'God the
Holy Spirit'; spirit is.]; spirit - most; /xx: Spirit – GNB, NKJV; /xxx: a Spirit – KJV, NWT; /xxx:
a spirit - ESV; [Cf. 'the spirit of yoůr Father' (Mt 10:20); 'spirit of Adonai' (Lk 4:18); ‘the Adonai
is the very spirit’ (2Co 3:17, 18

Arthrous vs. anarthrous: It is important for translators and interpreters should respect how the text
treats nouns as arthrous or anarthrous. Importantly, 'spirit' and 'holy spirit' are such examples but are
found to be the victim of eisegesis. [Note: A much serious example is 'God', when the arthrous theos
289
('the God') is simply and naively rendered as 'God' with no definite article as in common English
convention. [See the problems with Jn 1:1c "… the Word was God" vs. "… the Word was a god
(NWT)"; and 2Co 4:4 "Elohim of this age" vs. "the god of this world (KJV, NASB)", which is
thematically parallel to 2Th 2:11.]

Word Study on SPIRIT and HOLY SPIRIT;

The word 'spirit' is the translate word for Gk. pneuma. The Greek noun is neuter and should
take the English pronoun 'it', even the word is personified in the text. It should not take 'he', as is
done in the Trinitarian mindset. Grammatical gender of a noun is independent to biological
gender.
[Consult any English dictionary of other general meanings of ‘spirit’ in common English usage,
other than the meanings used in the Scripture.]

In the NT, spirit is power that flows, radiates, and moves; not 'impersonal force' or 'immaterial
substance'.

'ghost' (as in 'the Holy Ghost' in KJV) – archaic for 'spirit' ['Geist' in German].
Cf. God’s spirit vs. human spirits; spirit of things and ideas, cf. ‘evil/unclean spirits’;

Cf. Hebrew equivalent is H7307 ruach, 'breath' 'wind' 'spirit' (Gen 1:2)

• Concordance on 'SPIRIT'
• Concordance on 'HOLY SPIRIT' and 'THE HOLY SPIRIT'
• Concordance on 'Ghost' and 'Holy Ghost' in English Bibles

290
Concordance on 'SPIRIT'

(1) Anarthrous singular: 'a spirit'

(2) Anarthrous singular: 'spirit'
(3) Arthrous singular: 'the spirit'
(4) plural: 'spirits' 'the spirits''

Note: the word is neutral; it should take the pronoun ‘it’ ‘its’ where it is ‘sprit’ or ‘holy spirit’, not
he, his, him, taking it as the third person of Trinity Godhead. The descriptive noun ‘the
helper/comfort (masculine) in Jn 15:26 for the ‘holy spirit’ does not change.
(1) Anarthrous singular: 'a spirit'

'a spirit':
'a spirit got hold of him' – Lk 3:39
'a spirit of gentleness' – 1Co 4:21; Gal 6:1;
'a spirit of cowardice' (> of shrinking back in fear) – 2Tm 1:7
'a spirit of wisdom and revelation' – Eph 1:17
‘a spirit’ Lk 24:37, 39 – [i.e. 'something of spirit'] /xx: a ghost – NIV, HCSB; NET,
CEB, GW, NLT (not in KJV!);

(2) Anarthrous singular: 'spirit'

spirit and life – Jn 6:63;
'body without spirit (/breath-of-life /x: a spirit) – Jam 2:26
through spirit's sanctification - 1Pe 1:2;
not having spirit - Jud 1:19

• pneumati 'as to spirit' Lk 1:80; 1Pe 3:18 [vs. sarki 'as to flesh' 1Pe 3:18];
through spirit – Rm 8:13 [/x: by the spirit]

'spirit' in phrases:
• en pneumati 'in spirit' -- Jn 4:23, 24 (worship in spirit and truth); Lk 1:17 (~
and power); Rm 2:29; Rev 1:10; 4:2; 17:3; 21:10 /'caught up in the power of
spirit'; /x: in the Spirit - most; /in [the power of the] spirit - NWT; /1Co 2:13;
• 2Co 3:18 apo kuriou pneumatos ('from Adonai of spirit') [cf. 'the spirit of
Adonai' v. 17]
• Mt 12:28 en pneumati theou 'in God's spirit I expel demons''
• Phi 3:3 pneumati {theou} 'in {God's} spirit'
• 1Co 2:13 dadaktois peumatos (taught in spirit)
• Mt 1:20 ek pneumatos – from spirit
• Rm 8:1, 4 kata pneuma – after spirit
• Rm 7:6 in newness of spirit – [cf. 'new spirit' Ezk 11:19]
• Cf. Lk 1:80 krataioō + pneumati ('become stronger as to spirit')

291
 'spirit': of God and Mashiah

• Mashiah's spirit Rm 8:9

• God's spirit
Jn 4:24 – 'Elohim is spirit'
1Co 7:40;
Rm 8:9 'God's spirit' (pneuma theou; /x: the Spirit of God – most);
Rm 8:14 'by God's spirit' (pneumati theou); Cf. Rm 8:11 the spirit of the One
[Elohim] who raised up Yeshua
• Adonai's spirit (pneuma kuriou) (~ is upon me Lk 4:18); /the Spirit of Adonai –
JNT; /x: the Spirit of the Lord – most; /Jehovah’s spirit – NWT; Act 8:39 – (~~ took
Philip away')

3) Arthrous singular: ['the spirit']

When the Gk. arthrous 'to pneuma' (the spirit) without any modifier (such as 'holy' or 'of the
holiness') and is used as personified and in the sense of 'the very spirit' (most of time that of
Elohim), it is capitalized. A typographic device of capitalization itself does not help when reading
the text aloud. In IRENT, an expansion 'of Elohim' is added, i.e. the Spirit [of Elohim]

[See also separate heading for 'the holy spirit' and 'the spirit of the holiness'.]

'the spirit' in phrases:

• Mt 5:3 makarioi ~~ tō peumati ('as to the spirit' > 'in the spirit')
• Lk 4:14 en tē dunamei tou pneumatos (Cf. Lk 4:1 plērēs pneumatos hagious)
• Mt 27:50 aphiēmi + to pneuma Cf. ekpneō ('breathe one’s last'; Mk 15:372
39; Lk 23:46)
• 'by his spirit' – Mk 2:8;
• 'in my spirit' – Rm 1:9
• tō pneumati 'in the spirit' (Jn 11:33; 13:21); 'as to the spirit' (/x: 'in spirit' Mt
5:3)
• dia tou pneumatos (1Co 12:8)

• the unclean spirit; Mt 12:43; Lk 8:29 (cf. 'an unclean demon' Lk 4:33); Mk
9:20, 25; Act 16:18;
• the spirit ~ in the sons of disobedience Eph 2:2;
• the spirit of the world 1Co 2:12;

• the spirit of truth Jn 14:17; 15:26; 16:13; 1Jn 4:6 (put in contrast to ‘the
spirit of falsehood’);
• the spirit of grace Heb 10:29;
• the spirit of the prophecy Rev 19:10 (x: the Spirit of ~ – JNT; /what inspires
prophesying – NWT)

292
 • the spirit (human life principle) Jam 2:26 (rendered as ‘breath of life’ in
IRENT); Rm 7:6; 2Co 3:6;
'my spirit' Lk 1:47; 1Co 14:14;
'yield his spirit up' – Jn 19:30 [Cf. the breath of the mouth (Yeshua) 2Th
2:8]
'her spirit' – Lk 8:55;
• the spirit – Jn 3:5, 6, 8; 6:63; 7:37;
• the spirit (human faculties (in opposition to ‘flesh’; also in contrast to ‘soul’
and ‘body’); Mt 26:41; Mk 14:38; Lk 8:54; Act 6:10; Rm 8:4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 13;
1Co 2:11; 5:5; 14:2; Gal 5:17; 6:8, 18; Phi 4:23; Col 2:5; 1Th 5:23; 2Ti 4:22;
Phm 1:25; 1Pe 3:18 (in the realm of spirit; /x: by the Spirit);
• the spirit Lk 2:27 (in the power of spirit); Jn 3:6, 8; Rm 8:2 (the law of the
spirit); 8:23; 1Co 12:7 (manifestation of the spirit); 2Co 3:8, Gal 5:22; Eph
4:3; 6:17; 1Th 5:19; 2 Co 3:17 (Adonai is the spirit); 1Jn 5:6, 7 (cf. 'the holy
spirit' 1Jn 5:7 v.l.)
• the Spirit [of Elohim];a Mt 4:1; 12:31b; Mk 1:10, 12; Jn 1:32, 33; Lk 4:1,
14; Act 2:4b; 8:29; 10:19 (~ says); 11:12, 28; 20:22; 21:4; Rm 8:16, 26, 27;
15:30; 1Jn 3:24; 5:6, 8 (both in a triadic phrase); Rev 2:7, 11, 17, 29; 3:6, 13,
22; 14:13; 22:17;
• the spirit (gift); Jn 3:34; 7:39; Act 8:18; Act 18:25; Rm 12:11; 1Co 12:7;
14:12, 14, 15, 16, 32, 37; 2Co 1:22; 5:5; Gal 3:2, 5; Jam 4:5;

• the spirit of His Son Gal 4:6;

• the spirit of Yeshua Mashiah (Phi 1:19)
• the spirit of Yeshua (Act 16:7 v.l. the Spirit) [i.e. the spirit associated with
Yeshua [Ref. www.questia.com/read/5980992/the-theology-of-the-gospels
by James Moffatt p. 177]“(a) the divine power possessed by Jesus on earth,
and (b) the divine power which came upon His followers after His
resurrection, rendering their life stable and effective.”
• the spirit of Mashiah 1Pe 1:11;
• the spirit Mt 27:50 ('Yeshua yielded up the spirit of him').

a
It is the only occasion the word is capitalized, in addition to an expansion 'of Elohim' to clarify – often
when it is personified as Elohim himself in act. Cf. 'God's spirit']
b
Mt 12:31 (= the spirit of the holiness in v. 32)
293
 • the spirit of the glory and of Elohim 1Pe 4:14
• the spirit of YOUR Father Mt 10:20;
• the spirit which belongs to Elohim to pneuma to ek tou Theou 1Co 2:12
• the spirit of Elohim – 1Co 2:11, 14; 3:16; 1Pe 4:14;
• the spirit of our Elohim – 1Co 6:11
• the spirit of Elohim (= ~ of the God – Diagl); Mt 3:16; (/x: God’s spirit –
NWT); 1Jn 4:2, 3 (/x: the inspired expression from God – NWT); Mt 3:16
(/x: God’s spirit – NWT); 1Co 2:11, 14; 3:16; 1Co 6:11; 1Pe 4:14; His spirit
1Co 2:10 (Elohim ~ His spirit)

• the spirit of Adonai

(2Co 3:17); /the Spirit of Adonai – JNT; /the Spirit of [the] Lord – ALT; /x: the
Spirit of the Lord – most; /the spirit of Jehovah – NWT; /
(Act 5:9); /the Spirit of the Lord – JNT; /x: the Spirit of the Lord – most; /the
spirit of Jehovah – NWT; /

(4) plural: 'the spirits' and '*spirits'

Heb 12:23 – 'the spirits of righteous men'

Heb 1:14 – 'angels as ministering spirits'
1Jn 4:1 – 'the spirits' [prophetic spirits] of men
1Jn 4:3 – 'every spirit' [pan pneuma]
Mt 8:16 – 'the spirits' [in demon-possessed ones (S1139 daimonizomai)]
1Tm 4:1 – 'deceiving spirits' [S4108 planos]
Rev 16:14 – 'spirits of demons' [S1140 daimoniōn – demon]
Mk 3:11; 6:7; Act 5:16; 8:7; Rev 16:13 – unclean spirits [S169 akathartos (x: impure)]
Lk 7:21; 8:2 – 'evil spirits' [S4190 ponēros ('evil'); x: wicked ~]
Lk 10:20 – 'the spirits' [← of demons v. 17]
Mt 10:1 – 'unclean spirits' {//Mk 3:13 'demons'}
Mt 12:45 //Lk 11:26 unclean spirits

1Pe 3:19 – 'made proclamation [of the victory] [thrown down] to the spirits [– the fallen
angels –] in prison' [an example of crux interpretum]

294
www.openbible.info/topics/holy_spirit_indwelling

'indwelling

Give His holy spirit to you – 1Th 4:8

Receive a holy spirit – Jn 20:22;
Led by God's spirit – Rm 8:14
God's spirit dwells in you-all – Rm 8:9
The Spirit (of Elohim) itself testify – Rm 8:16;
the Spirit [of Elohim] come to our aid and ~~ intercedes – Rm 8:26
the mind-set of the Spirit of Elohim – Rm 8:27
Sealed with the promised spirit of the holiness. – Eph 1:13;
Fellowship in the holy spirit – 2Co 13:14;
In spirit's sanctification – 1Pe 1:2
Manifestation of the spirit – 1Co 12:7;
Energized (Empowered) by one and the same spirit – 1Co 12:11
The Spirit searched – 1Co 2:10
Pray in holy spirit – Jud 1:20;
Carried along in holy spirit – 2Pe 1:21;
Lead in spirit – Gal 5:18;
The spirit of the holiness fell on – Act 10:44; 11:15 '
The [gift of] holy spirit come upon – Act 1:8; 19:6
'filled with holy spirit' – Act 2:4;
The Spirit grants them – Act 2:4
Receive the spirit of the holiness – Act 10:47;
give the gift, that is, the holy spirit – Act 2:38
'the [corporate] Body of you-all is a temple of the holy spirit in you-all'– 1Co 6:19
Immersed in holy spirit – Act 1:5; 11:16; Mt 3:11;
Receive the spirit of the holiness – Act 10:47;

Sent the spirit of His son – Gal 4:6

In one spirit immersed into one body – 1Co 12:13

'

295
Concordance on 'HOLY SPIRIT' and 'THE HOLY SPIRIT'
Ref. Steve Swartz (1993), "The Holy Spirit: Person and Power. The Greek Article and Pneuma", Bible
Translator Vol. 44, No. 1, 1993; pp. 124–138. →
www.ubs-translations.org/tbt/1993/01/TBT199301.html?num=&x=0&y=0&num1=124
https://restitutio.org/2019/05/16/theology-15-challenging-the-holy-spirit/

English phrase 'holy spirit' comes in three different Gk. phrases with or without the article in
the Greek. IRET has it rendered in three ways. See below for concordance.

(1) hagion pneuma (ca. 54x) – 'holy spirit' [some renders as 'a holy spirit']
(2) to hagion pneuma, or to pneuma hagion (ca. 10x) – 'the holy spirit'
(3) to pneuma to hagion (ca. 33x) – 'the spirit of the holiness' [Almost all Bible
translations this with (2).]

God's spirit is what 'holy spirit' is. It is never in the sense of 'energy' or 'active force'a. As a gift it is
God's spirit poured down on people. Where the holy spirit is as the agent in the text, it is
personified, the power of Elohim in act. The holy spirit of Elohim is Elohim in act.

IRENT does not capitalize the word 'spirit' (either as 'holy Spirit' or 'Holy Spirit')b, regardless
whether it is arthrous to pneuma ('the spirit') or not. The use of capitalization of the translation
word does not warrant to support any preconceived idea of personhoodc of "the Holy Spirit" ('the
Holy Ghost' in KJV).

Nor does IRENT change the anarthrous phrase 'holy spirit' into the arthrous 'the holy spirit' as most
Bible translations carelessly do. They simply ignore presence or absence of the article in the Greek
text, rendering in wholesale fashion as 'the Holy Spirit' with capitalization to boot. For them the
distinction of the giver and the gift of holy spirit is not entertained.

a
'active force' (Mt 1:18 NWT-4 footnote)
b
IRENT capitalizes the word 'holy' only for the fixed Gk. phrase of Mt 4:15 'Holy Place'; Act 6:13; 'the
Holy Place'; Heb 9:2 'Holy Place'; Heb 9:3 'Most Holy Place'.
c
as pictured in the trinitarian notion of the holy spirit, as if is a 'person' of Spirit-being. Personhood –
psychological, socio-psychological and legal concept. Personhood of non-human beings is doctrinal and
theological notion. Even the definition of 'person' is made up to fit their arguments. Most scholars use the
word *personality (which is a psychological term) when they should be using '*personhood' (identity, reality,
and essence of a person). Note that 'person' is strictly of a human being. The religious notion that 'God' is a
person is anthropomorphism and literary device of personification. The Supreme Being is supra-personal,
beyond being a person. Here, the Trinitarian doctrine has failed rescue itself out of utter morass – in
linguistics, in logic, and in theology.
The word is used as an agent of act it is in personification, a literary device. There is no basis to claim that
H.S. is being called 'God' in these verses, whatever the word 'God' means. 'God the Holy Spirit' is a Trinitarian
jargon and is claimed to be a 'person' ('Person') – whatever the word 'person' means as it is never defined to
make arguments logical. Note that this God, the third person, is called 'God the Holy Spirit', but has no name
and is not an object of 'worship' (whatever the word 'worship' means) and is not prayed to other than being
asked to come down (a gift).
296
holy spirit (in the fixed phrases)
• ek pneumatos hagiou Mt 1:18, 20 ['from [the power of] holy spirit'.]
• en pneumati hagiō Mt 3:11 //Mk 1:8 //Lk 3:16 //Jn 1:33. Act 1:5; 11:16 [immerse in
holy spirit]a; Rm 9:1 (bears witness in h.s.); Rm 14:17; (joy in h.s.); Rm 15:16
(sanctified in h.s.) cf. Rm 5:5 sanctified);
• dia pneumatos hagiou Act 1:2 (give commandments); 2Ti 1:14 (guard through h.s.
which is dwelling in us); Rm 5:5 (the love of God has been poured out into
our hearts through holy spirit);
• en pneumati hagiō 2Co 6:6 (recommend ourselves by h.s.); Jud 1:20; (praying in
h.s.); 1Th 1:5 (with power and with h.s.); 1Co 12:3b (in h.s.); [= 1Co 12:3a (in God's
spirit)]
• hupo peumatos hagiou 2Pe 1:21 (being borne by h.s.)

• pneumatos hagiou (+ plēsthō), Lk 1:15, 41, 67; Act 2:4; 4:8, 31; 9:17; 13:9, 52
('filled with h.s.'; S4130 ≈ Lk 4:1 ('full of h.s.'); Act 7:55; 11:24; ('full of holy
spirit' plērēs +); Act 6:3, 5 (full of spirit);
• peumatos hagiou Tit 3:5; (renewal by h.s. – genitive); 1Th 1:6 (with joy of h.s.);
• pneumati hagiō Act 10:38 (+ S5548 chriō anoint with h.s.); 1Pe 1:12 (declared the
good news to YOU with holy spirit sent forth from heaven);

Cf. in power of holy spirit – en dunamei pneumatos hagiou Rm 15:13, 19,

'holy spirit' [as the promised/received gift. though it may be considered as used as a
countable noun (e.g. as a gift), it is not rendered as 'a holy spirit'.]
Jn 20:22 "Receive a holy spirit.; [Cf. Jn 7:39 the sprit (no spirit) to receive];
Act 8:15, 17, 19; 19:2 receive holy spirit.
Lk 1:35 holy spirit will come upon you,
Lk 2:25 holy spirit was upon him.
Lk 11:13 the Father in heaven gives holy spirit to those asking him!"
Heb 2:4 with apportioning (/distributions) of holy spirit according to his will?
Heb 6:4 tasted the heavenly free gift, … become partakers of holy spirit,

a
Cf. (immerse in holy spirit and in [refining] fire of spirit); [not 'fire to burn it up' – Mt 3:12] Cf.
[with the verb 'immerse', it cannot be 'immerse with'; cf. 'baptize (going through a ritual) with ~']
297
the holy spirit and the spirit of the holiness (ca. 43x) –
It is simply 'the spirit of Elohim' (1Co 2:11) which is God's power in action, not a separate
being or person from the God. It does not have a name. It is not prayed to. The Hebrew for
'spirit' also means 'breath'.]

the holy spirit (to hagion pneuma), or (to pnemua hagion)

Mt 28:19 [into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the ~]; Cf. 1Jn 5:7 v.l. (three that testify ~~
the Father, the Word and the h.s.)
Act 13:4 (sent out by ~); 16:6 (forbidden by ~ to speak);
1Co 6:19 (temple of the h.s.)
2Co 13:14 (fellowship of Life in the h.s.)

[as the promised or received gift of holy spirit]

Act 1:8 (the promised gift of holy spirit arrives upon you),
2:38 (receive the free gift, the holy spirit);
4:31 v.l.; 9:31; 10:45 (the free gift of the holy spirit was being poured out);

the spirit of the holiness – (to pneuma to hagion) either as the particularized
/aforementioned gift or as the spirit personified. [Cf. a unique expression in Rm 1:4 (kata
pneuma hagiōsunēs 'according to spirit of holiness')]
Mt 12:32; ['speaks against ~~] Mk 3:29 ['blaspheme against ~~];
Mk 12:36 [en tō pneuati tō hagiō said in ~];
Lk 2:26 (revealed to him by ~); 3:22 (~ came down upon him), (cf. //Mt 3:16 the spirit of
Elohim; //Mk 1:10 the spirit); 10:21 v.l. (ēgaliasata tō pneumati tō hagiō 'overjoyed
in ~); 12:10, 12;
Jn 14:26 (the helper, that is, the spirit of the holiness which the Father will send);
Act 1:16; 2:33 (promised ~); Act 10:47 (received ~); Act 13:2; 15:8 (Elohim, giving them ~)
Act 5:3 (play false to ~) = Act 5:4 Elohim = Act 5:9 (the spirit of Adonai), 5:32; 7:51 (resisting
~);
Eph 1:13 (esphragisthēte tō pneumati tēs epangelias tō hagiō 'sealed with the promised spirit of
the holiness')
Eph 4:30 ([grieving] the spirit of the holiness of Elohim – to pneuma to hagion tou Theou);
Act 9:31; 10:44; 11:15 (~ fell upon); Act 15:28; 19:6 (~ came upon them);

Act 20:23; Heb 10:15 (~ bears witness); Act 20:28 (~ appointed you);
Mk 13:11; Act 21:11; Heb 3:7 28:25 (~ speaking, ~says, ~ spoke);
Heb 9:8 (~ makes it plain);
1Th 4:8; (Elohim, who puts His Holy spirit in you to pneuma autou to hagion)

298
Examples within the context of 'the holy spirit':
• Mt 28:19 in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit,
2Co 13:14 The undeserved kindness of the Lord Yeshua Mashiah and the love of God and the
sharing (fellowship) in the holy spirit
Act 16:6 (forbidden) by the holy spirit, (hupo tou hagiou pneumatos)
Act 13:4, sent out by the holy spirit, (hupo tou hagiou pneumatos)
Act 9:31 comforted by the holy spirit (tē paraklēsei tou hagiou pneumatos)

Examples within the context of 'the spirit of the holiness':

• Mt 12:32; blasphemes against the spirit of the holiness, (kata tou pneumtos tou hagio) cf. //Mk
3:29 //Lk 12:10 (eis to hagion pneuma)
Mk 12:36; (said in the spirit of the holiness)
Lk 10:21 rejoiced in the spirit of the holiness

[h.s. the spirit as a gift]

Act 2:33 received the promise of the spirit of the holiness
Act 10:47 received the spirit of the holiness
Act 15:8 give the spirit of the holiness
• Examples: as the grammatical and thematic agent of the action verb – personification
(literary device). It is the power of Elohim himself in act. [These are at the core of proof-
texting for the personhood of 3rd person of Trinity God.]

Mk 13:11 but the spirit of the holiness is [speaking].

Lk 3:22 the spirit of the holiness descended upon Him
Act 19:6 the spirit of the holiness came on them
Lk 12:12 the spirit of the holiness will teach YOU
Jn 14:26 the spirit of the holiness – Paraclete will teach YOU
Act 20:28 the spirit of the holiness has appointed YOU overseers,
Act 15:28 For the spirit of the holiness and we ourselves have favored
Act 13:2; 21:11; 28:25; Heb 3:7 the spirit of the holiness says …
Act 10:44; 11:15 the spirit of the holiness fell upon
Heb 9:8 the spirit of the holiness makes it plain
Act 5:3; lied to the spirit of the holiness = Act 5:4 (Elohim) = Act 5:9 (the spirit of Adonai)
Act 7:51; resist the spirit of the holiness
Act 5:32; 20:23; Heb 10:15 the spirit of the holiness bears witness
Act 1:16 the spirit of the holiness spoke beforehand by David's mouth
Lk 2:26 revealed by the spirit of the holiness (hupo tou pneumatos tou hagiou)

299
['holy spirit' 'the spirit of the holiness' occurring in a prepositional phrase – (x 21 according
to BeDuhn):

• w/ the spirit of the holiness

Mk 12:36 "David said in the spirit of the holiness" (en tō pneumati tō hagiō)
Lk 10:21 "… became overjoyed in the spirit of the holiness" (tō pneumati tō hagiō)
Eph 1:13 "…were sealed with the promised spirit of the holiness, …'

• w/ holy spirit
Mk 1:8 baptize with holy spirit (pneumati hagiō); 1Pe 1:23 (ministering things ~);
Mt 3:11; Lk 3:16; Act 1:5; 11:16; Jn 1:33 baptized in holy spirit. (en pneumati hagiō)
Lk 1:15, 41, 67; Act 2:4; 4:8, 31; 9:17; 13:9, 52 (pneumatos hagio + plēsthēsetai) filled with
holy spirit,
Tit 3:5 pnematos hagiou (make us new ~)
Lk 4:1; Act 6:5; (v.l. plērē) 7:55; 11:24 (plērēs pneumatos hagiou) full of holy spirit,
Mt 1:18, 20 (conceived) by holy spirit (ek pneumatos hagiou)
Act 1:2 after he had given commandment through holy spirit to the apostles
Act 4:25 and who through holy spirit said by the mouth of our forefather David,
Act 10:38 anointed him with holy spirit and power,

Rm 9:1 my conscience bears witness with me in holy spirit,

Rm 14:17 the kingdom of God d … [means] righteousness and peace and joy with holy spirit.

Rm 15:16 the offering, acceptable, … being sanctified with holy spirit. (en pneumati hagiō)
1Co 12:3 except in by holy spirit. (en pneumati hagiō)
Rm 5:5 the love of God has been poured out into our hearts through holy spirit,
2Ti 1:14 This fine trust guard through holy spirit which is dwelling in us. (dia pneumatos
hagiou)

dia pneumatos hagiou (Act 1:2 gave commandments), Act 4:25 (said by the mouth of David); Rm
5:5 (Love of the God poured out in our hearts ~);

1Th 1:5 with power and with holy spirit (en pneumati hagiō)
2Co 6:6 by purity, by knowledge, by long-suffering, by kindness, by holy spirit, (en pneumati
hagiō)
Tit 3:5 making of us new by holy spirit. (pneumatos hagiou)
2Pe 1:21 they were borne along by holy spirit. (hupo pneumatos hagiou)

hupo tou hagiou pneumatos Lk 2:26 revealed ~); Act 13:4 (sent out ~); Act 16:6 (forbidden ~);
Jud 1:20 praying in with holy spirit, (en pneumati hagiō)
Mk 12:36 en tō pneumati hagiō (David said ~) (cf. //Mt 22:43 en pneumati);

When the phrase occurs as a genitive case–

• w/ holy spirit
1Th 1:6 with joy of holy spirit, (pneumatos hagiou)
Rm 15:13, 19 with power of holy spirit.
• w/ the spirit of the holiness
Act 9:31 the congregation … walked … in the comfort of the spirit of the holiness
1Co 6:19 the body of YOU people is [the] temple of the spirit of the holiness within YOU,
2Co 13:14 The undeserved kindness of the Lord Yeshua Mashiah and the love of God and the
sharing of [life in] the spirit of the holiness

300
 'holy spirit' 'the holy spirit' Total
Power 12 0 12
Baptism in, etc. 12 0 12
Filled with, etc. 14 1 15
Received, given 11 0 11
OT spoke 0 6 6
NT speaking 0 3 3
Personal 0 30 30

-- more or less consistent pattern of usage in arthrous and anarthrous:

anarthrous – as 'gift', arthrous as 'power from Elohim' and also as
particularized 'gift'. (From Steve Swartz)
Exact tally in this table needs to be checked.

Reference Subject Non-subject Total

arthrous 24 19 43
anarthrous 4 45 49
Totals 28 64 92
References to HOLY SPIRIT as non-subject may be arthrous or anarthrous,
with a 2 to 1 preference for anarthrous. In contrast, references to the Holy
Spirit as subject are nearly always arthrous. (Stephen Levinsohn)

301
Concordance on 'Ghost' and 'Holy Ghost' in English Bibles

Whether it is arthrous or not, KJV renders pneuma hagio as ‘the Holy Ghost’ in 89x
capitalized. Only four places it has as ‘the Holy Spirit’ in Lk 11:13 (the only instance in the
Gospels); other places – 3x Eph_1:13; 4:30; 1Th_4:8.

This KJV jargon is carried over to Trinity language ''God the Holy Ghost' (= 'God the Holy
Spirit').

The anarthrous Greek phrases is rendered as ‘the Holy Ghost’ (total 89x), now archaic, and as
‘the Holy Spirit’ only 4x (Lk_11:13; Eph 1:13; 4:30; 1Th 4:8). [Cf. also Lk 10:21 v.l. – KJV
‘in spirit’; others ‘in the H.S’ ‘in the Spirit’; /in holy spirit – NWT]

as ‘Ghost’ 89x.
In 88 places as ‘the Holy Ghost’
In 1 place as ‘the Holy Ghost’; - Mt 12:31 (with italics) (> 'the Spirit')
Not a single instance without the definite article.
In 4 places it is ‘spirit’:
Anarthrous Gk. phrase – 1x – Lk 11:13 (/x: 'the Holy Spirit' > 'holy spirit')
Arthrous Gk. phrase – 3x – Eph 1:13 (with ~ the promised Holy spirit tō pneumati tēs
epaggelias tō hAgiō); Eph 4:30 (the holy Spirit of God); 1Th 4:8 (his holy spirit)

There are few old translations using ‘Ghost’: Wesley (‘the Holy Ghost’ - x 86), Bishops (‘the holy ghost’
- 82x), Geneva (‘the holy Ghost’ - x 87; ‘holy Ghost’ – 4x Mk_12:36; Lk_12:10; Act_15:8; 20:23),
RV (‘the Holy Ghost’ - 72x), DRB (‘the Holy Ghost’ 92x)
8x verses (9x) – as ‘ghost’

302
‘ghost’ and related words in English Bibles:

KJV has ‘ghost’ (not capitalized) and in 8 verses it is as in the phrase ‘give up the ghost’ (an
idiom for ‘die’):
(1) for the verbal phrase ‘aphiemi to pneuma’ (literally ‘give out the spirit’) Mt 27:50; Mk
15:37, 39; Lk 23:46; Jn 19:30;
(2) and for the verb ekpsuchō ‘literally ‘give out soul’ ('give breath of one's last' Act 5:5, 10,
12:23).
The word ghost denotes in English usage something of spirit of a dead man. Cf. Greek phantasma
(‘apparition’) or psuchē (‘soul’ 'person' 'life'). On the other hand, the Greek word pneuma always
carries it sense to be quite equivalent to the English word spirit, unrelated to ‘ghost’. The word
‘ghost’ still appears in some modern English Bibles.

[vocabulary – ghost (of dead ones, or a shadow of someone/something), soul, spirit. Cf. in Korean – 혼魂,
영靈, 혼령魂靈, 영혼靈魂, 귀신鬼神, 정신 精神]
[Related word – QQ '*soul immortality' – what is meant by 'soul'? what is meant by 'immortality' Anything
suggesting such a pagan notion in the Bible?

KJV has ‘ghost’ in NT (98x); Cf. spirit 261x

Mt 1:18, 20; 3:11; 12:31,32; 27:50; 28:19;
Mk 1:8; 3:29; 12:36; 13:11; 15:37, 39;
Lk 1:15, 35, 41, 67; 2:25, 26; 3:16, 22; 4:1; 12:10, 12; 23:46;
Jn 1:33; 7:39; 14:26; 19:30; 20:22;
Act 1:2, 5, 8, 16; 2:4, 33, 38; 4:8, 31; 5:3, 5, 10, 32; 6:3, 5; 7:51, 55; 8:15, 17, 18, 19;
9:17, 31; 10:38, 44, 45,47; 11:15, 16, 24; 12:23; 13:2, 4, 9, 52; 15:8, 28; 16:6; 19:2,
6; 20:23, 28; 21:11; 28:25;
Rm 5:5; 9:1; 14:17; 15:13, 16;
1Co 2:13; 6:19; 12:3; 2Co 6:6; 13:14;
1Th 1:5, 6; 2Ti 1:14; Tit 3:5; Heb 2:4; 3:7; 6:4; 9:8; 10:15; 1Pe 1:12; 2Pe 1:21; 1Jn
5:7; Jud 1:20;

'ghost' in other translations: in Bishops (95x); Geneva (100x), DRB (102x); RV (79x)
Mt 14:26; Mk 6:49; 15:37, 39; Lk 23:46; Act 5:5, 10; 12:23; ASV
Mt 27:50; Darby
Mt 14:26; ALT, EBTV, EMTV;
Mt 14:26; Mk 6:49; ESV duo, NASB, TCNT, AMP, NKJV
Mt 14:26; Mk 6:49; Lk 24:37; PNT, GW, CEV;
Mt 14:26; Mk 6:49; Lk 24:37, 39; JNT, NET, NRSV HCSB, NIV, TNIV, GNB, ISV, Mft,
GSNT,

303
phantasma – 'apparition' – 2x - Mt 14:26 //Mk 6:49
/xx: ghost – most, ASK, NKJV; /apparition – NWT, RV, Whiston, Wesley, Whiston,
Rhm, ALT, EBTV, Darby, RV; YLT (for Mt 14:26; Mk 6:49; Lk 24:23);;/x:
phantom – ISR, CLV, Diagl, MKJV; /x: spirit – KJV+, BBE, AUV, WNT, EMTV,
Bishops, Geneva, /x: spectre – Noyes, Etheridge, Murdock; /ghost (or, apparition) –
ALT; [Idiomatically 'apparition' is comparable to ‘ghost’ in English, but connotation
is different and is of unbiblical pagan idea of ‘a dead soul’]

optasia S3701 (2x)

Lk 1:22; - /vision – most, YLT; /x: supernatural sight – NWT;
Lk 24:24 /vision – most /x: apparition – YLT, CLV; /x: supernatural sight – NWT;
/omit – NIrV, NLT, Murdock, Etheridge;
horasis, vision Rev 9:17
horama, sight Mt 17:9; Act 9:10, 12, 17, 19; 11:5, 12:9, 16: 9: 10, 18:9

304
305
the HOLY SPIRIT and paraclētos

*paraklētos [> parakaleō] – only in Johannine writings (G-John & 1Jn).

Best to be understood as an agent of action ‘standing by for someone in various

functions’. The context shows who or what the agent is.

(1) 1Jn 2:1 (/advocate – most); Referring to Yeshua Himself who stands by – with
Yeshua as the agent–/

(2) Jn 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7 Referring to ‘the spirit of the holiness (Jn 14:26)' as the
agent;
[Variously rendered as ‘helper’ ‘counselor’ ‘encourager’ ‘advocate’ ‘comforter’
‘intercessor’. Cf. /*Paraclete – DRB, Etheridge] [Note: Many translations take it
as a ‘person’ and take masculine pronouns – with figure-of-speech
personification of the holy Spirit or with characterizing the holy Spirit as a
‘Person’ in line with the Trinitarian doctrine. However, the holy Spirit as a
‘Person’ to ‘stand by’ alongside people – invisibly, spiritually, etc. – is a typical
isegesis and difficult to find it in harmony with the Scripture.]

The problem of 'person' related to the holy spirit in the Trinitarian language:

(1) In order to assert /A/ is a person, a clear unambiguous common-sense definition of the
word 'person' is a prerequisite. A technical juggernaut is an acceptable.
(2) What does constitute 'personhood' of /A/
(3) A quantum jump from the common literary device of '*personification' in which the
biblical text shows to the doctrinal formulation of the personhood of 'spirit' (which is 'breath'
in Hebrew mindset)?
(4) 'the Holy Ghost' 3r person of Trinity God – is nameless.

The basic sense of 'spirit' and 'holy spirit'.

In the Bible, the word “spirit” is translated from the Hebrew word ruʹach and the Greek word
pneuma. Most often, those words refer to God’s power, or holy spirit. (Gen 1:2) However, the
Bible also uses those words in other senses:

Breath. —Hab 2:19; Rev 13:15.

Wind. — Gen 8:1; John 3:8.

The vital, or animating, force in living creatures. — Job 34:14, 15.

A person’s disposition or attitude. — Numbers 14:24.

The holy spirit is God’s power in action, not impersonal force. (Mic 3:8; Lk 1:35) God sends
out his spirit by projecting his energy to any place to accomplish his will. — Psa 104:30a;

306
("When you [YHWH] send forth your Spirit (/life giving breath – NET), they [=all that which
was created] are created, …'); Psa 139:7 ('where I can get away from your Spirit or where can I
flee from your presence');

Spirit persons, including angels. —

1Kg 22:21 "Then a spirit came forward and stood before YHWH and said, 'I will deceive him
….';
Cf. Jn 4:24 'Elohim is spirit' (not 'a spirit').

These meanings all share the sense of something invisible to humans that produces visible
effects. Similarly, the spirit of God, “like the wind, is invisible, immaterial and powerful.”—An
Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, by W. E. Vine.

The Bible also refers to God’s holy spirit as his “hands” or “fingers”. (Psa 8:3; 19:1; Luke
11:20; compare Mt 12:28.) Just as a craftsman uses his hands and fingers to do his work, God
has used his spirit to produce such results as the following:

The universe. — Psa 33:6; Isa 66:1, 2.

The Scripture. — 2Pe 1:20, 21.
The mighty works performed by his ancient servants and their zealous preaching. — Lk 4:18;
Acts 1:8; 1Co 12:4-11.
The fruit of the spirit - fine qualities displayed by people who obey him. — Gal 5:22, 23.

Note: 1Jn 5:7 v.l. 'the holy spirit' of the triad 'Father, the Word, and the holy spirit'. The text
does not say it is a person. The text does not say same as the triad of 'the Father, the Son, and
the holy Spirit' in the phrase '(baptize) into the name of the Father and the Son and the holy
Spirit' (Mt 28:19) which is interpreted as a Trinity formula.

307
Fruitage and gifts of the Spirit

Gal 5:22 ho karpos to pneumatos 'fruit yielded by the spirit' /the fruitage of the spirit (- NWT) /the
fruit of the spirit (– most) is love, joy, shalom, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, v. 23
gentleness, and self-control – there is no law against such.” [Gk. karpos - /> fruit – most; /fruitage
– NWT;

Spirit as gift: The expression ‘gift of the Spirit’:

‘holy spirit’ to be given (as a gift) Lk 11:13 etc.
‘the spirit’ as metonym for the spirit given as gift’ – 1Co 14:14, 15, 16
‘the spirit of the holiness’ to be given – Jn 14:26
= the one to stand by (for the disciples) (paraklētos = the spirit of the truth)a Jn 16:13
‘the holy spirit’ Act 1:8; 2:38 = a gift promised,
that is ‘the promise of the spirit of the holiness’ (Act 2:33).
‘the gift of the [promised] holy spirit’ Act 10:46 [‘the gift’ = ‘the promised holy spirit’]
Especially taking up 1Co Ch. 12 and Ch. 14, enormous attention and attraction have been on the
‘gift’ in Christendom, esp. among so-called Charismatics, while the fruit of the Spirit is taken as a
passing statement.
Most read it as if gifts from the Spirit is something God doles out [for those who seek and bent after
‘gifts’]. The gifts listed should be read function and activity – as each one lives in the world to find
what can be taken on – all as the Spirit quickens – whether it is ability to heal the sick, speak and
interpret different languages to proclaim the Gospel message, or whether one is placed in the
Messianic community as an apostle, prophet, teacher, etc. It’s is not like getting something when
asked Genie in Aladdin’s lamp.
The practice of shamanic ‘tongue-speaking’ (gibberish or babbling) which was prevalent in the
pagan culture of the ancient Corinth in the first century and spilt into the congregation of Mashiah-
followers. That against which Paul admonished to give it up all in order for them edify the whole
corporate Body of the Mashiah has attracted millions of people in these last days, esp. in the culture
where native pagan religious setting makes them susceptible to such influence – South America and
Africa, the only areas in the world in which increase in number of Christians is reported. One of
telltale signs to reveal such true their mind set is divulged by their own lips - that the ability of
tongue-speaking (read ‘meaningless gibberish’) is a sure sign of their salvation. whatever the word
‘salvation’ may be meant by them. Most of them takes pride on such practice/ability. That the name
of the very God is YHWH is out of their mind. As they experience emotional release (akin to other
additions, as if reaching nirvana of their own), the mindset would not make it possible to see the
truth that the life’s foremost goal is to honor the very Name. It is not much different from the Adamic
nature of human being set for an endless pursuit of power and pleasure.
Yes, all the work of Elohim through Yeshua Mashiah continues in the holy Spirit from the
beginning of creation to its consummation. Everything fades out every day until the eschaton (the
last days) comes, since all the things of the holy Spirit – the things God works out His own will –
are finding the meaning in. The eschaton is none other than Yeshua Mashiah Himself. Aside from
being in Himself, with Himself and for Himself, nothing is better than rubbish (or dung - Phi 3:8).

a
'the spirit of the truth' – Jn 14:17; 16:13 – most renders as 'the Spirit of truth'; Ref. John Barclay Newman,
<Translating "IN SPIRIT AND TRUTH" and "THE SPIRIT OF TRUTH in the Gospel of John> - a copy in
the Collection.
308
Concordance Study on theos and elohim (God)

Gk. Concordance Study on ho theos (the God), theos (God, god); theoi (gods); Hebrew.
elohim, el – God;

[Ref. Charles T. Russella (1899-1916), The Atonement Between God and Man, pp. 69-71. It
has a useful collection of data and information relevant to this topic.
www.bibletoday.com/v5/volumefive_S02.htm]

The following Greek words are translated as *Godheadb in KJV [“… this particular English
word to the mind of ordinary English readers comes as a God with several bodies and but one
head.” Cf. a three-headed god image. What does it actually mean by ‘Godhead’ if it means
same as God? A particular God of Christian religions?]
• ho theios Acts 17:29 [theios, ‘divine’] deity; divine being [adj. ‘divine’ – 2Pet 1:3, 4]
• theiotēs – Rm 1:20 divine nature
• theotēs – Col 2:9 (fullness of the) God-being;

QQ
cf. ison tō theō (Jn 5:18) ‘equal to Elohim’ [not ‘same’ ‘identical to’]
cf. eis pan plērōma tou theou (Eph 3:19) ‘fullness from Elohim’, that is, ‘fullness Elohim
gives; not fullness of as himself Elohim.

Related words – [See also for ‘titles for God’]

kurios (Lord, master),
kurie (- vocative; O Lord!, O Master!, sir!);
despotes (Sovereign – Lk 2:29; Act 4:24; 2Pe 2:1; Jud 4; Rev 6:10)

Related phrase - ‘God the Father’ – does not appear in the Synoptic Gospel; Once in Jn 6:27
(ho pater ho theos ‘the Father, the very Elohim’).

In the Epistles it is in various phrases: Note: It is in the sense of ‘God, being (our) Father’.

1Co 15:24; 2Co 11:31; Col 1:3; Col 2:2; 3:17; Jas 1:27; (God and Father);
Gal 1:3 (God, our Father);
1Co 8:6; ‘eis theos ho patēr’ One God, the Father’

The English phrase ‘God Father’ cannot be used here since it has a different meaning.
Hence with a comma, or ‘God the Father’:

Gal 1:1; theou patros (through God, Father)

Eph 4:6; eis theos kai patēr pantōn – one God and Father of all

a
Pastor C.T. Russell of the Bible Student movement – after his death (1916) Jehovah's Witnesses and
numerous independent Bible Student groups emerged from this. Since 1931 its Watch Tower Bible and
Tract Society became the organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses by Joseph Rutherford, its founder, having
different doctrines, theology, and practices. [Cf. Ref. www.biblestudents.com]
b
http://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/eq/1978-4_223.pdf What do we mean by ‘Godhead’? Broyles.
309
 Eph 5:20; tō theo kai patri – to the God and Father
Eph 6:23; apo theou patros – from God, Father
Phi 2:11; eis doxan theou patros (to glory of God, Father)
1Th 1:1; Jud 1:1; en theō patri (in God, Father)
2Th 1:2; 1Ti 1:2; 2Ti 1:2; Tit 1:4; apo theou patros hēmōn ‘from God, Father of us’
1Pe 1:2; kata prognōsin theou patros ‘according to God the Father’s plan (s.
‘*foreknowledge’ elsewhere)
2Pe 1:17; 2Jn 1:3; para theou patros (from God, Father)

Related words:
• ‘divine (~ nature, being, essence, etc.)’ ‘divinity’ ‘deity’
• 하나님, 하느님, 천주(님) – in Korean; 神, (かみ kami - Japanese) 上帝; Allah. (Cf.
神 in kanji/hanja as 鬼神 – cf. '신들리다')
• 천주(님) – in Korean – a Catholic lingo.

The significance of such careful translation should not be missed, as IRENT adopts two
different words Elohim and God for the same Greek theos. It is shown to be obvious in the
example of Jn 1:1b-c. Most Bibles translate as ‘God’ on both occurrences. It is traditionally
rendered as ‘and the Word was with God and the Word was God’, KJV etc. a

This particular text has become the very source of the ‘Great Trinitarian Confusion’ as it may
be called – all because when we are not quite clear about how the word is used and don’t realize
the word is not what we think it means, in the source language as well as the receiver language
in translation work. The English word ‘God’, like its Greek word itself, carries different
meaning depending on the context, as like any word in the Scripture. ‘God’ itself is a title and
does not carry idea of identity. Its meaning comes only clear when it is elaborated by the
descriptive phrase. Here is where the arthrous phrase ‘the God’ text as is in the Greek text
comes to our help. It points to the reality, the identity of who God is, and also to what is meant
by ‘God’ – of course, none other than *YHWH Elohim (‘the LORD God’ in KJV as in Gen
2:4).

Compare it with IRENT rendering ‘and the Word was with Elohim, and what God is, the
Word was’. It does deal with the true sense of text to come refreshingly clear. The Greek theos
at the first occurrence is arthrous and points to the identity, while the anarthrous second
functions as an adjectival noun and is close to the English phrase ‘God-being’ in its nuance.

The word ‘God’, as heard every day, is usually a notion disconnected from the reality of who
He is – regardless whether it is within the religious setting or without, even in frivolous way.
Such is a generic God – the word without a clear specific reference. It includes mythological
gods (of Greek and Roman), gods of many religions (some indigent, some cultic, including
deism,), and gods of post-modern mindset (such as ‘knowledge’ ‘science’) all as a supreme god
which stands in place of and against the God of the Scripture). The Bible tells there are many
gods. b Whether one confesses belief or denies of any belief, every human being believes.

a
– to the great confusion to the general readers as well as the scholars and theologians; the priests
and pastors.
b
many gods – cf. polytheism: it is not ‘polytheism’ to believe there are many gods, but to believe in many
gods. ‘Monotheism’ is a belief in the one supreme God; it is often confused with a belief in the existence of
one god or in the oneness of God. What is called ‘monotheism’ is, then, actually monaltry.
310
 Everyone has at least one god and, as the fundamental source of all belief, it one’s own Self-
willed Sacred Selfa until it is abandoned to find the Almighty Supreme One, the Truth and the
Reality.

Consequently, even if it is said one believes in God, it is not a complete statement when the
question of which God – who is the God they believe – is not answered.

Even read on the pages of Bibles, ‘God’ as in English Bibles does not stand out in the readers’
mind - not much different than any generic God, while the true name and the reality behind,
YHWH Elohim, is being shoved into another room. ‘God’ as the word is used in different sense
by different people in different orientation (religious, deistic, or metaphysical, even atheistic).
Ironically, this makes so-called ecumenicalism and inter-faith cooperation feasible since, even
though they all use the word ‘God’, they can still not be bothered as they think they have their
own God with themselves. That’s why there is such thing called public prayer in sociopolitical
events and is still permitted, despite some opposition to such ‘freedom of speech’.

Without knowing clearly what is meant when we say ‘God’ we would be murky as to who is
referred. This would not help to resolve conflicts and controversies in the theological and
doctrinal issues. We need to be honest and open in our minds to take a linguistic and literary
approach to overcome theological-doctrinal agenda.

Concordance Study on ‘the son of Elohim’ > ‘the Son of God’; ‘God’s Son’

‘god’s son’ – Mk 15:39; //Mt 27:54 (from the lips of a centurion)

‘a God’s son’ – Mt 14:33; 27:40, 43; etc.
‘the son of Elohim’ (> ‘the Son of God’)

Concordance Study: ‘*in the name of’; ‘into the name of’; ‘*upon the name of’

in (on, into) (the) name of

Cf. eis tō onoma – Mt 28:19; Jn 3:18; Act 8:16; 19:5; 1Co 1:13
Cf. epi tō onomati - Act 2:38; 4:18; 5:40; 15:14 ‘upon the name of’ ‘for the name of’
Cf. en tō onomati - Act 3:6; 4:10; 9:27, 29; 10:48; 16:18; 1Co 5:14; 6:11; Jam 5:14; Phi 2:10 (with, at
the name);
Cf. en onomati - Mt 21:9; 23:39; Mk 11:9; Lk 13:35; 19:38; Jn 12:13; Eph 5:20; Co 3:17; 2Th 3:6;
(‘in a name of’)
Cf. tō onomati - Jam 5:10; 1Jn 3:23
Cf. eis onoma - Mt 10:41, 42; 18:5 (‘into a name of’)

Cf. immersed with water and with spirit [Mk 1:8; Cf. born out of water and spirit - Jn 3:15]

[Phrases:
• ‘heneken tou onomatos’ – Mt 19:29.
• ‘dia to onoma ~’ – Mt 10:22; ‘uper tou onomatos’ – At 9:16; 15:26 - ‘for (a person’s)
name’s sake’ ‘because of the name’ ‘for the name’.

a
self-willed sacred self – cf. Gen 3:5 “When you all eat of this …. you all will become as gods”.]
311
– ‘in behalf of’; ‘on the part of’; ‘by authority of’, ‘in the represented or assumed character
of.; as, it was done in the name of the people; (often used in invocation, swearing, praying,
and the like.).

• In NT it is ‘in the name of Yeshua’ that all things are done on the part of the
believers, be it going out, making learners (disciples), baptizing, or teaching. [The
phrase does not mean calling out his name ‘Yeshua’ or reciting the fixed formula ‘in
the name of Yeshua’. It means it is being done ‘in the authority of Yeshua’. Same
holds true for the so-called ‘Trinitarian baptismal formula’ which is a misnomer from
misunderstanding of Mt 28:19 ‘into the name of the Father and the Son and the holy
Spirit’ – which by itself has nothing to do with the unscriptural Trinitarian doctrine.]

in the name of the Lord [Yeshua] –– Act 9:28 (29)* (speak out ~);
in the name of Yeshua Mashiah –Act 3:6 (I order you ~); 4:10 (this man stands before
you having become healthy ~)
in the name of this very Yeshua– Act 9:27(proclaimed ~);
in the name of the Lord Yeshua –– Act 5:40(speak out~); Col 3:17 (do everything ~)
in the name of Yeshua Mashiah – 2Th 3:6 (give directives ~)
in the name of the Lord –Jas 5:14 (pour oil ~);
* verse break variation: Act 9:28 (29) παρρησιαζομενος εν τω ονοματι του κυριου
ιησου (most as v. 28 incl. DRB, JSS; it is in v.29 in KJV++, ASV, Darby, Noyes,
Murdock, MKJV, WNT, RSV, CLV, ISR, BBE, AMP, AUV, GSNT, YLT, Ko.)

Cf. Act 4:12

And indeed, in no one else
there is such salvation [to be found]!
Truth is, neither is there any other name under the heaven
that has been given among mortal humans
by which we must get saved.” [/x: can be saved.]

• It is only with Yeshua that the phrase ‘in the name of YHWH’ (>> LORD; /x: God)
appears –
(1) εν ονοματι κυριου Mt 21:9; 23:39; Mk 11:9, 10; Lk 13:35; 19:38; Jn 12:13 ‘the
One coming in the name of YHWH’ – all quoting Psalm;
(2) Jn 5:43 ‘I come in the name of My Father (i.e. YHWH);
(3) Jn 10:25 ‘I do in the name of my Father’.

[No such an expression as ‘done in the name of the Holy Spirit’ is anywhere in the
Scripture.]

εν τω ονοματι ιησου χριστου ~ εγειρε και περιπατει Act 3:6;

ποιω εν τω ονοματι του πατρος μου Jn 10:25
επαρρησιασατο εν τω ονοματι του ιησου Act 9:27;
παραγγελλω σοι εν [τω] ονοματι ιησου χριστου Act 16:18;
ελαλησαν εν τω ονοματι κυριου Jam 5:10;
αλειψαντες [αυτον] ελαιω εν τω ονοματι του κυριου Jam 5:14;
παραγγελλομεν δε υμιν αδελφοι εν ονοματι του κυριου [ημων] ιησου χριστου 2Th 3:6;
εν τω ονοματι του κυριου [ημων] ιησου [χριστου] συναχθεντων 1Co 5:4;

312
 εδικαιωθητε εν τω ονοματι του κυριου ιησου [χριστου] και εν τω πνευματι του θεου
ημων
1Co 6:11;
ευχαριστουντες ~ εν ονοματι του κυριου ημων ιησου χριστου τω θεω και πατρι – Eph
5:20;
ποιητε ~εν ονοματι κυριου ιησου Col 3:17;

‘into the name of’ εις το ονομα; εις ονομα:

– different sense and nuance.

εις ονομα προφητου Mt 10:41, 42;

εις το ονομα του πατρος και του υιου και του αγιου πνευματος Mt 28:19
[See under ‘*baptize into the name of’ e.g. Acts 8:16; 19:5.
Cf. ‘baptize in the name of’Act 10:48.]
πεπιστευκεν εις το ονομα του μονογενους υιου του θεου Jn 3:18;

‘upon the name of’ επι τω ονοματι; επι ονομα:

διδασκειν επι τω ονοματι του ιησου Act 4:18, 5:28;

λαλειν επι τω ονοματι του ιησου Act 5:40;

‘through the name of’

dia tou onomatos tou hagiou paidos sou Iēsou Act 4:30;

The phrase in conjunction with pisteuō;

πιστευητε εις το ονομα του υιου του θεου 1Jn 5:13;

πεπιστευκεν εις το ονομα του μονογενους υιου του θεου Jn 3:18;
πιστευσωμεν τω ονοματι του υιου αυτου ιησου χριστου 1Jn 3:23

The phrase ‘in my name’ (/on the basis of my name) in Yeshua’s sayings:

‘(Do) in my name’ Mt 18:5, 20; 24:5; Mk 9:37, 39, 41; 13:6; 16:17; Lk 9:48; 21:8.
Cf. Jn 14:26 (Father sends Paraclete in my name)
Cf. 1Co 1:15 (Paul - baptize into my name)

The phrase ‘to ask in the name of’ (aiteō en tō onomati) is unique in G-Jn (Jn 14:13, 14;
15:16; 16:23, 24, 26) – ‘in my name’ (en tō onomati mou) as spoken by Yeshua. [See EE on
the phrase ‘pray in the name of Jesus’ here.28

313
The phrases with ‘name’ associated with baptizō:

epi – [‘upon the basis of the name of’]

βαπτισθητω εκαστος υμων επι τω ονοματι ιησου χριστου Act 2:3829 (Yeshua Mashiah)

en – [‘in the name of’– ‘with the authority from’]

βαπτισθηναι εν τω ονοματι ιησου χριστου Act 10:48;

eis – [‘into the name of’ – ‘into the person of (i.e. covenant reality; fellowship with)’]
βεβαπτισμενοι υπηρχον εις το ονομα του [κυριου] ιησου Act 8:16;30 (Lord Yeshua)
εβαπτισθησαν εις το ονομα του κυριου ιησου Act 19:5; (Lord Yeshua)
εβαπτισθημεν εις χριστον ιησουν Rm 6:3 (Mashiah Yeshua)
εις χριστον εβαπτισθητε χριστον Gal 3:27 (Mashiah)
βαπτίζοντες αὐτοὺς εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ Πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ Υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ ῾Αγίου Πνεύματος, (Mt
28:19b) 31
εις το ονομα παυλου εβαπτισθητε 1Co 1:13; (Paul)
εις τον Μωσην εβαπτισαντο (εν τη νεφελη και εν τη θαλασση) 1Co 10:2; (Moses)

The phrase ‘in my name’ in the setting of the so-called *Great Commission
(Mt 28:18-20)

Mt 28:19a [The phrase ‘in my name’ is frequent on the lips of Yeshua; equivalent to ‘in
the name of Yeshua’ outside the Gospels. In his Historia Ecclesiae (ΕΚΚΛΗΣΙΑΣΤΙΚΗ
ΙΣΤΟΡΙΑ ‘Church History’) (prior to 303 CE) Eusebius quotes twice (in Bk 3, Ch. 5.2
and Ch. 16.8) one sentence of Yeshua’s saying “Go ye, and make disciples of all nations
in my name”, which corresponds to Mt 28:19a with this additional phrase appearing at
the end.

His quotation was in the context of Church history as the Church grew with ‘making disciples’.
I don’t see he touched on the Great Commission, or even ‘baptismal practice of the Church as
such.
A quotation does not constitute a text variant or version. It does not offer a proof for ‘more’
authentic texts in which the entire 28:19b (of baptismal phrase) would be ‘originally’ absent.

Mt 28:19b “baptizing them [to bring] into the very name of the Father and the Son and the
holy Spirit”

[See EE here for this v. 19b. in the various ancient sources, Didache and The Diatessaron of
Tatian as well as a family of Hebrew Gospel of Matthew.] 32

Against the manner which is held by the Trinitarian, it should be emphasized that this phrase
itself is NOT a Trinitarian; nor a baptismal formula, something to be pronounced at the
initiation of the rites. Such an erroneous interpretation is no doubt from confusing it with the
phrase ‘in the name of’, which carries a very different sense, the sense of ‘in the authority of’.
Intentionally or inadvertently, most Bibles have it translated that way. The truth is that, it is an

314
 expression in a triadic phrasea, something which is consequent to having received an immersion-
rite.

Not to be forgotten of the fact that when the Messianic Community is empowered to carry out
every command given by Yeshua, including immersion-rite (e.g. Act 2:38) it is in the very name
of Yeshua – not ‘in God’s name’, nor ‘in the name YHWH’.

In the work of translating the Gospel with this phrase removed may be prerogative belonging to
translators. However, they should be honest enough to show the removed sentence as such
clearly in the footnote, if not within the text. 33

a
Triadic passages in the NT – instead for biblical tri-uity, they are used for proof of the Trinitarian doctrine.
http://trinities.org/blog/podcast-107-dr-robert-m-bowman-jr-on-triadic-new-testament-passages-part-1/
www.bible.ca/trinity/trinity-text-triadic.htm
315
Concordance Study: ‘*to call the name of’ and ‘call upon the name’

[cf. ‘to name (a person)’ ‘to call (a person by the name of a name)’; Cf. ‘title’ ‘name’ ‘calling-name’ ‘label’
‘epithet’ ‘descriptor’.

[To call a name is not to utter the name in some proper pronunciation. It is neither to use the name as a
mantra. It is to praise the name to entrust everything in Him which the name stands for and identifies.]

The expression ‘to call (out) (a name)’ is very different from ‘to call upon (a name)’. The two should not be
confused. [Cf. /x: ‘call on’ (- make a visit on or drop by in English usage.) Using, writing, calling, referring
to a name is not same as ‘calling upon a name’. (e.g. 1Chr 16:8) LXX epikaleisthe auton en onomati autou
‘call upon him by his name’]

[the name of Adonai (> YHWH)]

• Act 2:21 ‘call upon the name of Adonai’
• Rm 10:13 ‘call upon the name of Adonai’; [Cf. Rm 9:17 ‘my name be declared’; Rm 15:9 ‘sing to
Your name’]
• Rev 15:4 ‘glorify Your name’
• 1Ch 16:8 ‘Praise YHWH; Call upon His name; Make what He has done known to the people!”
Exomologeisthe to kuriō; Epikaleisthe auton en onomait autou; Gnōrisate en tois laois to
epitēdeumata autou (Cf. ‘praise’ – Heb. yada – /give thanks to – most; /acclaim /acknowledge –
LXX)
• Gen 4:16 “began to call upon the name of YHWH” [Cf. ‘YHWH appears first time in the Scripture
– Gen 2:4 ‘YHWH Elohim made earth and heaven’]

[the name of the Lord Yeshua]

Epikaleomai +dative:
• Act 9:14 ‘call upon your name’
• Act 9:21 ‘call upon this name’
• Act 22:16 ‘call upon the name’
• 1Co 1:2 ‘call upon the name’
• 2Tm 2:22 ‘call upon the name’

Other phrases:
• Heb 2:12 ‘proclaim his name’
• Heb 13:15 ‘acknowledging his name’
• 1Pet 4:14 ‘reproached for the name of’
• Rev 2:13 ‘hold fast to my name’
• Rev 3:5 ‘acknowledge/confess/declare my name’
• Act 9:15 ‘bear my name’

316
Johannine collection
[See also 'Appendix + Footnotes on John 1.1' in IRENT Vol. VI – Appendix – NT']

*I am vs. *I Am

So-called 'GREAT I AM', a fanciful unbiblical expression.

Exo 3:14 [See EE 34]

Exo 3:14a I'm who I'm ░░ [Ehyeh asher (H834) ehyeh (H1961 hayah)] /> I am who I am; /xx: I AM
WHO I AM – most; [LXX egō eimi ho ōn 'I, I am who I'm']
Exo 3:14b I'm [who I'm] ░░ [ehyeh] [ho ōn – LXX = 'I'm', not 'I, I am']/> I am; /xx: I AM – most;
[This English translation phrase 'I am' (or 'I AM') is not the name of God, as used for interpreting Jn
8:58]

In IRENT Vol. III Supplements #3 (Collections #3A – God & Names) see the PDF file ((For WB #3 -1)) Jn
8.58 and 'I Am' Problem.

[The phrase ‘I am’ with the verb copula; does not have sense of ‘exist’. The latter can in
the context of time and space with conditional explicit or implicit.]
<I am who I am>; <I am the one who ~>; <I am he>
<I am what I am>; <I am how I am>; <I am why I am>;
The translated English phrase ‘I am’ as it is often spelt as ‘I Am’ and ‘I AM’ is in a
doctrinal neologism, thinking it is a sort of the name of God – misreading, misinterpreting
and misapplication in eisegesis of Exo 3:14-15.

Used as a translation word in the English Bible, the English word ‘God’ is not a name but
a label or title and its referent can be men as well. Cf. divine being; God-being; god; God;
the God, etc.

The verb eimi (present, singular, 1st person) in Greek and the corresponding ‘be’ in English)
is a linking verb (does not mean 'to exist'). It complete a sentence it requires a
/Subject_complement makes the sentence complete. Often in Greek it is in ellipsis; the
context should make it clear. 'emi' alone without egō (95x) is rendered as I'm – e.g. 1Co 9:2
etc. [most has it ‘I am’. The only translation has it is NLT (31x in NT).

The Gk. phrase egō eimi (47x) -- Gk. When the pronoun 'egō' is not needed for a
complete sentence but, when it is present, it is for emphatic. but it is non

With a subject complement implicit, the phrase is in the sense of ‘it’s me’.
With a subject complement it is in the sense of ‘I am (such and such)’. To bring ‘I’
emphatic, IRENT renders it as 'I, I am'.

317
 'I am' on the lips of Yeshua:
I, I am – the true vineyard Jn 15:1;
the way, the truth and the life – Jn 14:6;
the resurrection and the life – Jn 11:25;
the good shepherd – Jn 10:11, 14;
the gate – Jn 10:7, 9;
the light for the world – Jn 9:5;
the living bread – Jn 6:51;
the bread of life – Jn 6:35, 48;
the bread that which came down from heaven – Jn 6:41;
I, I am not from out of the world – Jn 8:23
I, I am the one who testifies – Jn 8:14, 18;
I, I am with yoů – Mt 28:20;
where I, I am to be – Jn 7:34, 36;
where I, I am – Jn 12:26; 14:3
I, I am from – Jn 8:23;
I, I am in the Father – Jn 14:10;

In the following the subject complement in ellipsis; the context makes clear.
I, I am [who I am] – Jn 8:24, 28, 58; 13:19;
I, I am he. (i.e. ‘It’s me’) – Jn 4:26; 8:24, 28; 13:19; 18:5, 8; Mk 14:62; (Lk
22:70);
[Jn 8:58 is not different from the rest of the examples in the NT, but it is confused as
the substitute name often with capitalizationa as 'I Am' or even 'I AM', from proof-
reading of a text in Exodus in eisegesis. The fact is that it does not correspond to the
phrase ho ōn Exo 3:14b LXX which is a descriptive phrase, not a name. Jn 8:58 is not
a quotation of Exo, nor it is anything of a name.

See the include folder <Jn 8.58 and 'I am' problem> in IRENT Vol. III - Supplement (Collections
#3A.1 - God, Yeshua, & Names).

'I am' with reference to other than Yeshua:

the man said 'I, I am the one' – Jn 9:9;
I, I am Elohim of Abraham Mt 22:32 //Mk 12:26;
I, I am Gabriel – Lk 1:19;
I, I am the very Mashiah – Mt 24:5 //Mk 13:6; (//Lk 21:8)
Yohanan the immerser:
'I, I am not' -- Jn 1:20, 20, 27; 3:28; Act 13:25.
'I, I am a voice' – Jn 1:23
Cf. I and the Father are one. Jn 10:30
in me the Father and I in the Father. Jn 10:38;

a
Lo, it seems capitalization is what makes something God!
318
Jn 1:1 *Logos; *Word

[S3056 logos (331x) masc. – 'word' in G-Jn:

Of Elohim - Jn 1:1 (2x), 14; 5:38; 8:55; 10:35; 17:6, 14, 17;
Of Yeshua – 2:22; 4:41, 50; 5:24; 6:60; 7:36; 8:31; 37, 43, 51, 52; 12:48; 14:23, 24; 15:3, 20 (2x); 18:32; 19:8;
pl. in 7:40; 10:19; 14:24; 19:13]
Of a person, people -- 4:39, 12:38; 17:20; 21:23;
Of a proverb, scripture – 4:37; 12:25; 18:9,

[cf. S4487 rhēma (80x) 'saying' 'utterance' Jn 3:34, 5:47; 6:63, 68; 8:20, 47; 10:21; 12:47, 48; 14:10; 15:7; 17:8 – all
pl. in G-Jn (12x). Danker p. 314 (saying, statement, pronouncement, declaration – Mt 4:4, etc.; a
matter/thing/event – Mt 18:16 etc.)]

[← H1697 dābhār/dābār (Psa 33:6); Aramaic memra.] [= the word of YHWH Psa 33:6 (≈ rhēma – the saying of
YHWH Isa 55:11, 1Pe 1:25)]
[Cf. H2451 ḥokmah ‘wisdom’, as a personified agent in Pro 3:19; 8:22-31.] [Yeshua the Mashiah as the wisdom of
Elohim 1Co 1:24, 30. (Cf. Lk 11:49; 7:35, 1Co 1:21; Rm 11:33; Eph 3:10)]

Jn 1:1 the Word [of Elohim] ░░ The risen Yeshua Mashiah was given titles, 'the Word of Elohim'
(Rev 19:13), 'the Word of the Life' (1Jn 1:1). The word of Elohim is 'the bread out of the heaven' Jn 6:33
= 'the bread of Life' Jn 6:48 = figurative 'flesh' of Yeshua himself Jn 6:51, 53.

The Greek ho logos is traditionally rendered as ‘the Word’ (capitalized), which is adequate to convey its
sense and context in Jn 1:1, 14. [5:7b v.l.].a

It is the word, the very word of utterance, here that of God's self-expression of His will and thoughts in
action (as in creation and revelation), esp. as the word-event in connection to Gen 1:1ff. The Logos is
expressed in God’s fiat in the Creation. (Hence, it is capitalized as in most translations, because it is that of God,
not that it is 'God').b

The Logos (v. 1) is not same as nor does it refers to 'pre-existent Jesus'c or 'preincarnate God [the Son]'
nor 'eternal Son of God';d Yeshua is what the Word incarnate (Incarnate Logos) is (v. 14). (cf. Mt 1:23
‘Immanuel’).
It is not a person, nor it is personified here.e It is 'it', not 'he'. [There is no reason to have it take a masculine third
person pronoun – he, him – in v. 2, 3, 4. – as almost all translations do (with a few exceptions, such as Tyndale &
REV). It should be 'it', not 'he' – it is same as for the pronoun for 'light' – v. 10, 11, 12.]. Capitalization scheme is easy
to mislead in eisegesis by bringing into the text something other than what it is, making it the second 'Person'f of Trinity.

a When REV has it uncapitalized as 'the word', it ignores the particular context the word is in. A transliterate ‘the Logos’
(e.g. Moffatt), is meaningless, being a Greek philosophical term, to the English readers of the Scripture.
b It is not an abstract notion (of Greek stoic philosophy), such as 'reason' or 'organizing principle of everything', nor it is

a certain being apart from God. The word ‘Logos’ does not have a sense of ‘message’. Cf. Dave Brunn (2013) wrote in
One Bible, Many Versions p. 83 “The Logos of God is his message to humanity. …’ – it's an erroneous statement from
misunderstanding and inattention. The word ‘message’ itself has become a fad (owing to Eugene Peterson’s The Message,
his own personal rewriting of the Bible, masquerading as a translation. Even the ‘Gospel’ is not a message (to be sold);
it is Yeshua Himself.
c 'pre-existent Jesus' - preexistent before his virgin birth of church myth.
d even ‘Cosmic Christ’ or 'archangel Michael'.
e "The humbled Word made flesh, so small like us, so weak, …" [quoted from a poem in Peter De Rosa (1974), Jesus

who became Christ', p. 57]

f 'Person' – capitalized when used as a Trinitarian lingo; from Latin persona ('actor' 'role') which is a translation of Gk.

theological term hypostasis.

319
In the heavenly realm, the one only true God is with His Word (logos) (the very word of self-expression of
His will)a and His spirit (which is God’s breath, the creative power in act); there is no a separate being ‘the
Son of God’ as the second Person of the so-called Triune God. Incarnation is of God’s Word, not of ‘God the
Son’. [Note: ‘God’ and ‘Son of God’ are ‘equal’, but not same or identical. It is the Word which did not begin
to exist, being with Elohim from the beginning (Jn 1:1a-b). It is not same as to say "the Son of God did not
begin to exist, being with the Father from the beginning". The Logos is the Logos of Elohim; not a God’s
creature, like an angel. The Son of God is Yeshua, the man; man is a creature, unless we insist that there is
something like an ‘uncreated man’. Yeshua was called ‘God’s son’ on his conception; was sealed as the
beloved son of Elohim (> ‘Son of God’) at His immersion by Yohanan.

1Jn 5:7 the Father, the Word, and the holy spirit, ho patēr ho logos kai hagion pneuma
[It is remarkable to see 'word' ‘Logos’ instead of ‘Son’ in the text of the controversial Comma Johanneum
1Jn 5:7b-8b. The text as it says of the no-nonsense tri-unity of testimony, not the spurious illogical nonsense
trinity of man's doctrine (of three persons, each being God, still denying three gods), which is expected to
be ‘Son’ as the Trinitarian position would like to have ‘Son’ here to fit for their Trinitarian formula of
'Father + Son +Holy Ghost' of the Trinity, three ‘persons’, each one being ‘God’, all together they are one
God, not three!

Cf. John J. O’Donnell, The Mystery of the Triune God (1989), p. 94 “Augustine also stresses the
psychological analogies based on the human soul, according to which the Logos is the verbum mentis of
the Father. This tradition will find its full flowering in Aquinas who understands the processions of the
Son and the Spirit as acts of intellect and will.” [Verbum mentis (Lat. ‘mental word’) - The concept; the
intra-mental product of the act of intellection.]
Quotation from http://rhetoric.byu.edu/
[Greek word] Logos names the appeal to reason. Aristotle wished that all communication could be
transacted only through this appeal, but given the weaknesses of humanity, he laments, we must resort to
the use of the other two appeals. The Greek term logos is laden with many more meanings than simply
"reason", and is in fact the term used for "oration."

Part III. 2. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CONCEPT OF LANGUAGE IN THE HISTORY

OF WESTERN THOUGHT – (A) Language and Logos

“In the earliest times the intimate unity of word and thing was so obvious that the true name was
considered to be part of the bearer of the name, if not indeed to substitute for him. In Greek the
expression for "word", onoma, also means "name", and especially "proper name" — i.e., the
name by which something is called. The word is understood primarily as a name. But a name is
what it is because it is what someone is called and what he answers to. It belongs to its bearer.
The Tightness of the name is confirmed by the fact that someone answers to it. Thus, it seems to
belong to his being.
Greek philosophy more or less began with the insight that a word is only a name — i.e., that it
does not represent true being. … Belief in the word and doubt about it constitute the problem
that the Greek Enlightenment saw in the relationship between the word and thing. Thereby the
word changed from presenting the thing to substituting for it. The name that is given and can be
altered raises doubt about the truth of the word. …” [from Gadamer (1975), Truth and Method,
p. 406]

a
not ‘Preexistent Son’, ‘God the Son’, ‘Pre-Existent Messiah’, or ‘Cosmic Christ’, etc. – all these are
nonbiblical and unbiblical nonsense.
320
Jn 1:1b (Gk. ho theos ‘the God’)

[See discussion on ‘Elohim’, ‘God’, ‘Adonai’ ‘YHWH’ and ‘Lord’ in a separate subheading.]

The first occurrence in Jn 1:1 is arthrous ho theos, that is, ‘the God’ – the very God of the
Scripture. The traditional rendering ‘God’ does not by itself distinguish from God of generic
notion, nor from ‘god’.

Thus, seeing from linguistic point of view, ‘God of the Bible’ which is upheld as God of the
Church or the Christian religions is disconnected from the very God of the Scripture, Elohim.

By the word ‘God’ alone it conveys ‘what God is’ (i.e., *God-being), but the reality of ‘who God
is’ is failed to show (i.e., the very God who carries His special personal name).

In contrast the Greek phrase ‘the God’ conveys not only ‘what God is’ by the word ‘God’, but
also the definite article ‘the’ points to ‘who God is’. The translation word in IRENT is ‘Elohim’
(Hebrew word of ‘God’), not ‘God’ – nor ‘the God’, since the definite article is not used for ‘God’
in English convention.

Note: God as the English word can be a person, a thing, a concept or image. However, in the
Scripture, Elohim is not a being (as if a countable noun), neither a person, nor ‘God’. The Logos
of Elohim is not a person, neither a god (NWT translation), nor Jesus up in the heaven on the right
hand of God’. The holy Spirit is not a being, neither a person in the heaven on the other (left?)
side of God’, nor a power or force. It is that which radiates out from Elohim (‘proceeds’) (Cf. Jn
14:26; 15:26; 16:13. Act 2:33) [Cf. Spirit of His Son – Gal 4:6; Mashiah’s Spirit Rm 8:8; Spirit
of Yeshua Mashiah – Phi 1:19; Spirit of your Father – Mt 10:10]

321
Jn 1:1c ‘and what God is, the Word was’ – Gk. theos

In its second occurrence (Jn 1:1c), the same Greek word theos is anarthrous a . and functions as
adjectival, in the sense of ‘as God’ (not ‘like God’) or ‘God-being’ (not ‘the God’). In the Greek phrase
καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος it is emphatic being fronted within the sentence for prominence.

As the lack of distinction in most translations between arthrous and anarthrous noun is very
unfortunate. Though it is clear to everyone that in v. 1b the God (rendered consistently as 'Elohim' in
IRENT) is with whom the Word (Logos) was present, once they come to the last clause of v. 3 which
is translated as ‘and the Word was God’ (in most English Bibles), the text is misinterpreted into
theological quandary. Most failed to grasp the significance of the presence of the (definite) article. The
word ‘God’ without a definite article is only descriptive, not referential, nor about the identity. [‘God’
– of ‘what God is’, ‘God-being’ (Jn 10:33; Phi 2:6; Gal 4:8, 9); not ‘the God’ – ‘who God is’] 35

[Note: NEB failed when it translates as ‘what God was’ – it is not about a past state but should be put
in gnomic present.] [v. 3 explains how Logos is ‘fully God’.]
[Cf. Jn 5:18 ‘being equal to Elohim’]
[See Jn 1:18 and v.l.; Jn 20:28; also ‘Immanuel’ Mt 1:23]
[Cf. Col 2:9 ‘in Mashiah all the fullness of God’s being dwells] [cf. God-being]
(Cf. Col 1:19 ‘in the Son all the fullness [of God’s being] to dwell’ -
(Cf. Eph 3:19 ‘you all may be filled with all the fullness from Elohim’)

• Cf. NET rendering ‘and the Word was fully God’ comes just short by failing to reflect the
Greek word order to keep the phrase its right place within the sentence. A common adjective
‘divine’ (as in Moffatt’s translation) is simply inadequate and misleading, since something or
someone other than the true God may also be ‘divine’, quite different from ‘having fullness of
God’. [See a separate Greek adjective for theios (2Pet 1:3, 4).

• A notable translation is to read the text as ‘and the Word was a god’. A representative
example is NWT. Its result is that they have two gods, one Almighty God (with the
name ‘Jehovah’ they want not to be dropped from constant and diligent use) and
another, ‘mighty god’.36 This is even worse than a unitarianism.

a
[anarthrous theos – e.g. Jn 1:18; 10:33; Rm 9:5.] Cf. it is arthrous ho theos = 'the God' (which is rendered throughout
in IRENT as Elohim) in Jn 20:28 – “my Master and my Elohim” (> my Lord and my God; not 'my Lord and God') – See
elsewhere on this verse under *Yeshua.
322
Problem of Jn 1:1c translation

– copied a graphic image

from <Walk through the Scripture 1 – Words, Words, and Words>

323
Jn 1:14 ‘Incarnate Logos’; the *mystery of the Mashiah

Jn 1:14 become as flesh [+] ░░ [of true humanity] [as a human person, not just a human being
of flesh and bloom. Not demigod or a ‘god-man’ (Gk – theanthropos), but God's presence in
the person of Yeshua.

[‘Incarnate Logos’ (also 1Jn 4:2-3; Phi 2:7) 'Incarnate God's Word', not 'God Incarnate' or
'Incarnate God [the Son]'. What became as flesh is the Logos, not ‘the God’ (v.1b). Not 'God
Incarnate'] [Thematically similar to *Immanuel, which is ‘With us is Elohim’ (Mt 1:23) i.e.
Elohim acts in the person/life of Yeshua in power of (holy) spirit.]

[Yeshua was the Logos Incarnate – the mystery in the whole Scripture – embodiment of the
word (Logos) of Elohim. Not 'God' in heaven coming down into a god-man or demigod on earth
– which belongs something of reincarnation [god →man → god but with spirit – body, not soul-
body relation].

The expression ‘the Mashiah, the mystery of Elohim’ (Col 2:2) refers to who He is as the Logos
Incarnate. [Cf. ‘the mystery of the Mashiah’ Eph 3:4; Col 4:3 = things hidden until revealed
which are held by the Mashiah. Cf. ‘this mystery ~ which is the Mashiah in you’ Col 1:27).]

[A Trinitarian mind-set would claim that ‘the Word’ in vv. 1 & 14 is ‘Jesus’. This is also true
for Jehovah's Witnesses' position!]

Yeshua – he was not a god-man or demigod miracle worker. He was believed as the Son of
God.

Church 'Jesus' is claimed to be a pre-existent heavenly being close to God (aka Cosmic Christ),
whom God has sent into world – totally unbiblical. He is claimed to be 'God Incarnate' which
G-John does not say. The Biblical Yeshua is the Incarnate Logos of Elohim, the embodiment
of God's Word in the very human person God has chosen (i.e. divine and God-powered in holy
spirit).

Theological metamorphosis:
Bible teaching Religious doctrine
Yeshua born of a woman, Jesus born of a Virgin (asexually)
Father - Yosef Joseph – not His father
The son of Elohim God the Son → God of God
Elohim has sent Sent from God (*).
Yeshua Mashiah Jesus Christ → God Jesus
(anointed by Elohim) (Cosmic Christ)
*cf. 'sent from the heaven Jn 3:31 vs. 'come from the earth' Elohim';
Cf. 'sent from Elohim' - Yohan the Immerser Jn 1:6)

324
Jn 1:14ff ‘only brought-forth’ ‘only begotten’

The one-and-only Son [of Elohim] ░░ (see = 1:18; 3:16, 18; 1Jn 4:9; Heb 11:17) [See
Appendix: Jn 1:18 monogenēs theos for full discussion of mss variants and exegesis] {/mss}
{/the only Son}; {/the only one} {/the only God} {/only God}; [Only some from Alexandrian
family of mss read as ‘God’. Church Fathers used mss with ‘Son’.] ░░ /the one-and-only Son;
/the only begotten Son – KJV; [{/mss} from Gnostic corruption. See EE for textual variants:
/xx: the only God – ESV; /xx: the only one, himself God – NET; /x: the only begotten god –
NWT; {/mss} /the one and only Son, who is himself God – NIV;]
https://youtu.be/W_BGX28er9Y

[This thematically significant word appears in only G-Jn among the Gospels, especially in reference to
Yeshua.] [traditionally ‘only-begotten’, a translation predating KJV. Not only it is archaic, but also such
anthropomorphic expression, somewhat misleading when used in reference to God’s.] [‘begotten’ as from
male principle is literally understood to make the Son (the Logos Incarnate) as a literal [absurdly biological]
son of God-being (as in literal understanding by Muslims) and as a figurative son of a created being (as
entertained by most taking anti-Trinitarian positions).

Revering the name YHWH

When they say the name of their (Christians') God is 'Jesus', whatever happened to the name – the
name of the true God, Elohim? Hidden away; replaced by a mere title or a concept; neglected;
ignored; become irrelevant, uncomfortable with. Identity becomes confused.

"Revering [the name of] YHWH is

the beginning of knowledge:
but fools despise wisdom and instruction" (Pro 1:7)

To revere is to love, to learn and to live with. How does a translator to help the
readers then?

“You shall not take the name of ‫( יהוה‬YHWH) your Elohim

in a manner unworthy37 for it.” (Exo 20:7; //Deu 5:11)

You are to revere YHWH your Elohim,

serve Him to take your oaths by His name. (Deu 6:13)

Revere YHWH your Elohim, serve him, be faithful to him

and only in His name you shall take oaths. (Deu 10:20)

Do not take an oath by my name falsely,

to be profaning the name of your Elohim;
I am YHWH. (Lev 19:12)

The praise of YHWH my mouth will speak;

And let all creature bless His holy name
325
 to time indefinite, even forever. (Psa 145:21)

How wonderful it is to come to give thanks to YHWH

And to sing praise to your name, O Elyon!
(Ps 92:1) (Elyon = ‘Most-High’)

YHWH who made [earth],

YHWH who formed it to set it firmly
— YHWH being his name —
says this:
“Call out to Me and I will answer you…” (Jer 33:2-3a)

On that day you will say,

"Give thanks to YHWH! Call on His name!
Proclaim His deeds to the nations,
declare His exalted name.
Sing to YHWH, for He has done marvelous things
— let it be known throughout the earth. (Isa 12:4-5)

Tetragrammaton (YHWH):

The Problems of Tetragrammaton

(1) Finding its pronunciation and correct renderinga
(2) Keeping the name in the Old Testament. b
(3) Finding the name in the LXX and the Greek New Testament
(4) Importantly and seriously, placing the name rightly reverently in the English translation of
even the NT.c
(5) Sanctifying the Name in the lives of those who confess the faith in Him. d
*Transliteration is the mapping of a word from one alphabet into another. Transliteration is not
concerned with representing the exact sounds (phonemes) of the original — it only strives to
represent the characters accurately. B. Kedar-Kopfstein [“The Interpretative Element in Transliteration”, 57,
58] notes that “theory and practice of translation agree on the principle that proper names should be
transliterated." Quoted from
www.academia.edu/10457621/_Aspects_of_rendering_the_sacred_Tetragrammaton_in_Greek
Pavlos D. Vasileiadis, "Aspects of rendering the sacred Tetragrammaton in Greek", Open
Theology 2014; Vol. 1:56-88

Ref. www.yrm.org/challenges-sacred-name-answered/
[extracted and edited – AJR]

a
'Yahweh' (as in Jerusalem Bible) vs. 'Jehovah' (based on faulty knowledge of its pronunciation and
of history of the letter 'j') vs. transliteration YHWH (/x: JHVH)
b
'the LORD' – most;
c
Unfortunately, such practice has been treated as befitting in unorthodox religious practice. agenda.
Is the name treated in reverence? Should the name itself be in place of his title on every time our
language, be it one's own fathers or our heavenly Father?
d
Cf. In the 'Lord's Prayer' Mt 6:9 //Lk 11:2 'Hallowed by thy name' – KJV, ASV; [hagiazō S37
'sanctify' 'keep holy']
326
A long tradition of avoiding the revealed Name of the Heavenly Father, YHWH (Isa 42:8) from
Judaism and Christian religions, even in the Bible translations.

1. Doesn't He have many names, not one to use? [Question is from confusion of
names, attributes and titles.]
2. Doesn't He know whom I mean no matter what I choose to call Him?
3. "The pronunciation of the Name has been lost; do we how His Name was
spoken?"
4. “But there are no vowels in the Hebrew, so how can we know how to pronounce
the four letters of YHWH correctly?”
5. “When the Bible speaks of His name, doesn't it just mean His authority, not His
literal name?"
6. "I speak English, not Hebrew, so I use the English God and Lord." "I have had
prayers answered using the words so it must be okay to use those titles."
7. Isn't the use of the name associated with people of religious doctrines different
from orthodox tradition?

327
Tetragrammaton in OT translation.
It is unthinkable to leave the sacred name in the Hebrew Scripture out of the English Bible
translations; but sadly, many traditional Bible translations have done such a practice leaving only
handful in place.

KJV and many other translations have the name replaced with 'the LORD' except in only very few
places. The consequence of such practice of 'shunning' the very name of Elohim has been not
insignificant.

A few numbers of translations keep it as in the text, render YHWH (the Tetragrammaton) throughout in OT
as it should be:

Jehovah – ASV (1901), Darby (1890), NWT (1961).

Yahweh – Jerusalem Bible (1966) and New Jerusalem Bible (1985) – both are Catholic.

History of translation of God’s name in OT:

Tyndale (1530) translation of the several books of OT used the old English word 'Lorde'. KJV 1611 used using
LORD (in caps), but only in a small number of places as ‘IEHOVAH’, a establishing longstanding English
Bible translation till very this day. Most English Bibles follow KJV with the word which is actually a literal
translation for the Gk. kurios in LXX.

It is appropriate to render the Hebrew word Tetragrammaton consistently wherever it occurs in OT as it should
be, to resist the practice of avoiding and neglecting the name in translation work in the style of Jewish tradition
(also the example of LXX translation of TaNaKh) – an effort of restoring the sacred name.

[cf. The word 'Jehovah' itself cannot be a biblical word; it was coined by combining the original Hebrew name
YHWH and 'Adonai'. – Masoretic vowel pointing. Note: the glyph 'J' was originally for the Gothic font for the
capital letter I; same as in 'Jesus' as appears in the original KJV 1611 version. It does not reflect accurate
pronunciation; and modern translations adopt 'Yahweh'; a few 'Yahuwah' 'Yahuah' vs. 'Yahueh'.

‫* ░░ יהוה‬Tetragrammaton, the four-letter Hebrew word for the very name of the Almighty; transliterated as
YHWH. ‘Yah’ is the short form (e.g. as in ‘Praise Yah' (> 'Hallelujah’) e.g. Rev 19:1 ff.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetragrammaton

In /Shem_Tob ('Hebrew Gospel of Matthew') " …contains Ha-Shem 19 times in the abbreviated form ‫ה״‬
where the Gospel of Matthew has either κύριος or θεός (1:22,24; 2:13,19; 3:3; 4:4,7,10; 5:33; 15:8;
21:9,12,42; 22:31,32,37,44; 27:9; 28:2) and once (28:9) in full (‫ )השם‬where the Gospel of Matthew has no
corresponding term (28:9), employing it not only in Matthew's Old Testament quotations, but also in his
narrative, either when introducing such quotations (1:22, 22:31) or when speaking of the "angel of the Lord"
(1:24, 2:13, 2:19, 28:2) or the "house of the Lord", i.e., the Temple (21:12). …"

a
http://sceti.library.upenn.edu/sceti/printedbooksNew/index.cfm?TextID=kjbible&PagePosition=139
(facsimile)
328
Tetragrammaton in NT

The raison d'être of IRENT practice of the Hebrew name of God in the NT is to remove
confusion as to who is referred by the Greek kurios as to —
(1) 'Lord Elohim' ('Lord God' – Gen 15:2 etc.),
(2) or 'Lord Yeshua' (often as 'Lord Yeshua Mashiah in the Pauline Epistles').

– in the appropriate context of the biblical texts keeping His name honored.

When the Gk. kurios, when referring to God, is anarthrous in NT it can easily be seen
as equivalent to Hebrew YHWH. Most often it is in the direct quotation of OT within
the NT IRENT renders them as YHWH. Otherwise as Adonai – a notable example is
where it was put on the lips of the crowd in Mt 21:9; //Mk 11:9; //Lk 19:38; Jn 12:13
(which is from Psa 118:26). RENT renders as 'YHWH' (40x), 'Adonai' (172x) [Cf. as
'the Adonai' 60x for ho kurios which is rendered as Jehovah in NWT.] [vide infra].

The arthrous Gk. ho kurios in the NT refers either to Elohim or to Yeshua; a few places
it is ambiguous, but careful reading of the texts in the proper context should decide.
The English word 'Lord' is not retained in IRENT as Elohim (the God)..g.

The translation practice of NWT with 'Jehovah' in NT (237x) has linguistical and
scriptural problems. It is justified in the case of anarthrous kurios, though outside the
directed quoted OT this would not help honor the sacred name. The serious translation
problem is that it renders the arthrous ho kurios even it clearly refers to Yeshua, and
in some places the Greek ho theos ('God')a! This does not honor the very name of God.

It falls back for support their practice on the number of Hebrew versions of NT
appeared (largely of 18th c. to 20th c.) with the divine name; quoting them would not
exonerate for their otherwise commendable but biased faulty practice.

Ref. http://tetragrammaton.org/ [esp. on NWT position]

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2008567 Should the Name Jehovah Appear in the
New Testament?]
http://jwfacts.mobi/does-jehovah-belong-in-the-new-testament/ Jehovah in the New
Testament?
http://tetragrammaton.org/JehovahinNT.pdf
Ref. George Howard, "The Tetragram and the New Testament", J. of Biblical Literature, Vol. 96, No. 1
(Mar., 1977), pp. 63-83
[See the relevant files collected in <IRENT Vol. III - Supplement (Collections #3A - God & Names)>.]

a
[One example: Rm 4:3 tō theō (dative), which is rendered as 'God' in most English Bibles; as
'Elohim' in IRENT.]
329
The main and sole purpose of keeping the divine name of God the Most-High within the translated text of NT
is linguistic and literary. The linguistic and literary approach which is the fundamental position for the IRENT
translation itself, not doctrinal and theological.

The purpose is to remove any confusion on the innocuously simple word ‘Lord’. Its meaning is not clear; and
used in various senses and usage. [Many words have same problem. A similar concern is what prompted to
render Gk. arthrous ho theos (‘the God’) as ‘Elohim’, not ‘God’.]

The result is that to the readers of the Bible the very name is revealed and make know with His name. Most
does not know His name and why it matters. Instead they have different name as the name of their God (i.e.
‘The name of our God is Jesus’). Its result is because of how rightly to translate the very name of God within
NT. In turn, it tells us that it should not be used and uttered frivolously. a

a
Treating G‑d's name with reverence is a way in Judaic life to give respect to G‑d.
Elokim instead of Elohim for the same reason.
www.jewfaq.org/name.htm#Pronouncing Nothing in the Torah prohibits a person from pronouncing the
Name of God. … However, by the time of the Talmud, it was the custom to use substitute Names for God.
… Although the prohibition on pronunciation applies only to the four-letter Name, Jews customarily do not
pronounce any of God's many Names except in prayer or study.
330
Detailed Analysis on the word 'Jehovah' in NWT NT (237x) vs. IRENT
[For further detail, see the file 'Jehovah' and 'the Lord' in NWT NT vs. IRENT in IRENT Vol. III -
Supplement (Collections #3A)]

IRENT NWT Heinfetter

kurios ho kurios kurios ho ho (total) Common His own*
kurios theos$ w/ NWT
YHWH Adonai the Adonai Jehovah

G-Mt 9 7 1 16 1 1$$ 18 15
G-Mk 4 4 1 9 9 8
G-Lk 6 23 7 36 36 21 +1
G-Jn 2 2 4 1$$ 5 2
(Sub) 23 34 9 65 1 2 68 46 +1
Act 4 16 25 21 24 7 52 6 +3
(Sub) 4 16 25 21 24 7 52 6 +3
Rm 3 10 1 12 5 2 19 15 +6
1Co 6 (2)& 4 6+2& 6 1 15 12 +7
2Co 10 10 10 8 +2
Gal 0 0 1 1
Eph 3 3 3 3 6 2 +4
Col 1 4 1 4 1 6 4
Phi 0 +7
Heb 1 8 3 9 2 1 12 9
1 The 1 (1)& 2 2+1& 1 4 3 +4
2 The 1 ..1 1 2 3 1
2 Tim 1 2 1 3 1 4 3
(Sub) 5 43 21 47+3 24 6 80 61 +30
Jam 1 2 6 3 6 4* 13
1Pe 3 3 3 2
2Pe 5 5 1 6 5
Jude 3 3 3 1
Phm +2
(Sub) 1 13 14 6 5 25 8 +2
Rev 6@ 6 10 2 12 3 +2
(Sub) 6 6 6 10 2 0 12 3 +2
Sub 37 116 65 157+3& 57 20 237 124 38

Total 216 (YHWH or Adonai) 237 162

Cf. +3 (Lord's – for Yeshua)
&

[*taking the phrase 'en kuriō' ('in the Lord') as referring to God, rather than to Yeshua.]

331
 From BeDuhn a

NWT: There are actually seventy-eight (incorrect listing and counting as those crossed
out or some more – ARJ) passages where a New Testament author rather directly quotes
an Old Testament passage in which YHWH appears in the original Hebrew. [an asterisk
the eight cases where the NWT translators inconsistently chose not to put "Jehovah" into
their translation.] –
Mt 3:3; 4:4, 7, 10; 5:33; 21:9, 42; 22:37, 44; 23:39. (10)
Mk 1:3; 11:9; 12:11, 29 (x2), 30, 36. (7)
Lk 2:23; 3:4; 4:8, 12, 18, 19; 10:27; 13:35; 19:38; 20:37, 42. (11)
Jn 1:23; 6:45; 12:13, 38 b (4)
Act 2:20, 21, 24, 34; 3:22; 4:26; 7:49; 15:17. c (8)
Rm 4:3, 8; 9:28, 29; 10:13; 11:2*, 8*; 34; 14:11; 15:11. (10)
1Co 1:31; 2:16; 3:20; 10:21d, 26. (5)
2Co 10:17. (1)
Gal 1:15*; 3:6 (2)
2Th 1:9*. (1)
Heb 2:13; 7:21; 8:8, 9, 10, 11; 9:20*; 10:16, 30; 12:5, 6; 13:6. (12)
Jam 2:23 e (1)
1Pe 2:3*; 3:12 (x2), 15*; 4:14. (5)
Rev 4:8. (1)

In English translation of NT
In a few places in NT, the Greek word kurios (‘Lord’) almost demands to be translated as the
Divine Name itself. While no ‘superstitious attitude’ as claimed as such should prevent to
show the Divine Name, but it is in reverence to Him that His name is to be known and be
honored. Thus, use of the Divine name itself in English NT translation deserves a careful
consideration. In reality the very Elohim is turned into a nameless Godf in Christian religions,

a
Ref. Jason BeDuhn (2003), Truth in Translation pp. 168ff Appendix: The Use of ‘Jehovah’ in the NT. –
a copy is in IRENT Vol. III Supplement (Collection #3A).
b
(10). In the NWT translation of Jn 12:38 the second "Jehovah'' is based in an Old Testament quote with
YHWH. The first "Jehovah" of Jn 12:38, however, is based on a "Lord" (kurie - vocative) in the Greek Old
Testament which has no corresponding YHWH in the Hebrew text.
c
(11). Of the two occurrences of "Jehovah" in the NWT version of Act 15:17, the first has no basis in the
original Hebrew of the Old Testament quote
d
.(12). There are two occurrences or "Jehovah" in the NWT's translation of 1Co 10:21. The first "Jehovah"
has no basis in any Old Testament passage. The second is part of the phrase "the table of Jehovah". Such
a phrase does appear in Mal 1:12. Assuming that Paul is making an allusion to that Old Testament passage,
this second "Jehovah" is justified according to the NWT's principle.
e
(13). In Jam 2:23 the first "Jehovah" of the NWT translation is based upon YHWH in the original Hebrew
of the Old Testament quote. The second "Jehovah" is used in place of God saying "my" in both the Hebrew
and Greek Old Testament texts.
f
‘A nameless God’ – (a cosmic God; a God of deism; a generic God). Conceptually ‘the nameless God’
cannot exist, unless it is meant when a speaker say as ‘a nameless God particularized by him’. It is in league
with the idea of ‘God has many names’ [s.v.]. The Bible is read the God (=Elohim) who has one revealed
name as having many names (from confusion of name with title). This gives a way to an idea of a
replacement by a nameless God – a global, universal, and cosmic God – a man-conceived syncretic God
332
 who goes by a nonspecific title ‘Lord’ or ‘God’ which as appearing in NT English translations
often obscures who really is referred to in the Scripture and psychologically and mentally gets
transformed to something like a generic god or deity, a miracle worker par excellence, as in
Deism, New Ageism, or ecumenical syncretism.

Within the NT we have it only as Greek word kurios to refer to the very God of the Creator.
However, this Greek word is non-specific and used in several different senses and may be
rendered as Lord, lord, master, or, owner, and, in vocative, as ‘sir’, depending on its referent
in the context.

In modern English ‘lord’ has a limited usage. The word ‘Lord’ (with initial letter in upper
case) in English bible translations is a title which may be applied to the God or Yeshua (cf.
LORD in all in upper case in OT instead of YHWH).

When the word ‘Lord’ occurs in the New Testament, even in the Gospels, the readers often
get confused and not easy and clear whether God or Yeshua is referred to. [E.g. Mt 22:43-45].

IRENT resolve this issue, purely on the linguistic and literary basis, not on any doctrinal or
theological ground by rendering it in several different ways when the Greek word Kurios refers
to the very God of the Scripture, YHWH Elohim.

• Kurios as LORD (all in upper case) – one problem with this is that there is no distinction
apparent when read aloud. Another point is the word may have the referent non-specific as to
whether YHWH Elohim or Lord Yeshua.
• Kurios as Adonai (Hebrew word) – it is used especially when it is necessary to show its
referent clearer (e.g. LORD and Lord/lord appearing within a single, though ‘master’ may be
more appropriate than ‘Lord/lord’). Simply the typographic device of word capitalization itself
is not enough.
• Kurios as YHWH – in a very limited number of instancesa it is rendered as YHWH when the
word is used to refer to the name itself rather than a title, and the sacred name itself is to be
revealed and manifest in the appropriate context and speaker-audience setting. It may be
vocalized as ‘Adonai’ as in the Masoretic tradition Hebrew text of TaNaKh (Hebrew Scripture;
Old Testament). The correct pronunciation is close to Yahuah (ye-HU-weh). Many scholars
favor ‘Yahweh’. However convincing detailed Scriptural and phonetical arguments for their
preference are lacking and all quotations from writings, commentaries, dictionaries, and
encyclopedias one may come across are simply a copy of copy of copy of someone’s
proposition who had started at the beginning. [Cf. 'Yahweh' << 'Yahueh']

In the practice of rabbinic Judaism in its history, they have refrained from pronouncing the sacred
Name. However, the Rabbinic authority which God has mandated has NEVER banned the use of
the sacred Name. It is not due to some superstitious attitude to avoid the name, but is to have God’s
name and that which it stands for be kept sacred and honored. [Cf. Exo 20:7 “You shall not take
the name of ‫( יהוה‬YHWH) your Elohim in a manner unworthy for it (/> ‘in vain’ – KJV).”] [Cf.
1Ti 6:1. “... the name of Elohim and the teaching be not maligned (/blasphemed).”] [See
*blasphemy]

From www.edah.org/backend/JournalArticle/1_2_intro.pdf (2001)

of religious pluralism, to be offered not only as a compatible God (devoid of any particularity to make
people of religions tolerant to each other), but also as a means to achieve ‘paradise’ or ‘nirvana’ on earth.
It is nothing other than a human-faced comic God.
a
Examples of YHWH within the NT translation of IRENT: Importantly in the text of OT
quotations where MT text has it as YHWH.] [The examples where having ‘YHWH’ is undesirable
– e.g. Mk 11:9 ‘Praised be the One who comes in the name of Adonai’, which comes out of the
crowd’s voice.]
333
 … Contemporary thinkers from diverse fields have taught us that language does more than
describe the objective universe around us: Words shape our understanding of reality and
how we relate to the world. The logos creates, as it were, our universe. The Torah considers
names crucial, expressing and perhaps determining the character and destiny of their
bearers. If this is true about persons in space and time, it is true a fortiori about how we
understand God, who has no independent empirical character. Halakhah’s insistence on the
careful use of the divine Name reflects this philosophic awareness. That sanctifying God is
conceived of as ‘qiddush Ha-Shem’ — sanctifying God’s Name — is no coincidence.

For various examples of English translations of NT where the God’s name based on
Tetragrammaton appear, see EE here.38]

What we see in their translations may be correct – lexicographically and theologically on their
own. However, such practice is not appropriate for translation work which should be based on the
linguistical and literary approach with due attention to Sitz im Leben of people in cultural and
religious setting - the intended and applied readers of the Scripture and the translations.

Regarding a zeal to restore sacred name in the Bible translation, here in dealing with NT, one
thing is clear: it is one thing to put the Divine Name (YHWH or in its equivalent) where the Name
needs to be revealed and manifest, justifiably and rightly so, as IRENT have done. However, it is
an entirely different matter to put the sacred Name everywhere conceivable (to the translator’s
eyes). This would achieve their goal of making a Bible to serve their doctrinal agenda very well.
By doing that, they are oblivious to the context and the intention of the text passages and are
ignorant of the speaker-audience setting, whether the audience is intended or implied. Would
anyone use one’s father name spelled out and pronounced everywhere and everyplace he is to be
mentioned, instead of ‘father’, or even ‘dad’? It is a common sense they have missed, having
fallen into scholar’s fallacy. It is not restoration of the sacred Taken off a doctrinal and sectarian
veil covering the eyes, anyone can see the name is not honored. In fact, it is treated in a manner
unworthy for it and impertinent regarding His name.

In summary, it is imperative for an honest translator to pay due consideration to have the God’s
personal name in the New Testament English translation. The only rule of our life in the Mashiah
is to have the very name of God Himself honored – that means,
• to respect the name – not ‘to take up in vain, unworthy to this name’, no
frivolous treatment of His name; (See ‘*blasphemy’)
• to revere – ‘revering [the name of] YHWH is the beginning of knowledge’
(Prv 1:7)
• to remember
• to reveal and have it revealed – not to let it buried wherever the name has to
out
• so that Elohim is shown to be clearly the very God of Scripture, not having
been confused or mixed up with one of many Gods popping out from human
minds of intellectual, metaphysical, or religious bent.
It is not a theoretical opinion but a living principle. God loves us; we love others. We just do not
love others as a consequence. But we are to love others in order to have His name honored through
our life in the Mashiah of YHWH.

The most important of all among other things about a person is the name itself, which stands for
who a person is.

334
 Cf. ‘face’ – notion of ‘face’ in Hebrew and oriental culture. [Check for Introduction to Fox’s Five
Books of Moses on this topic.]

Next to this subject of God’s own name, important is how we can divorce ungodly
use of the most common word ‘God’ itself from what it meant originally before
being adopted as an English word for Elohim (in Hebrew), theos (which is its Greek
translation). Though a typographic convention of using the initial letter in upper
case, it does not help the readers to have a clear word picture, association, and, more
importantly, linkage to the very Elohim, who is revealed in TaNaKh and by Yeshua
Mashiah. One should check for how and why IRENT renders the arthrous Greek ho
theos (‘the God’) as Elohim, and also to check for also why, how and where YHWH
is used in IRENT. The primary purpose, an agenda if you will, is to remove
linguistic and literary confusion which beset most of English translations, including
those with sacred Name restoration into NT.

335
To have the Divine name placed rightly in the New Testament

It is serious to undertake bringing the very name of Elohim into the NT translation – a task quite different
from ‘restoring’ His name in the OT translation (e.g. ASV, Jerusalem Bible, NWT).

It is seen in quite a number of translations (in a variety of spelling and pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton,
in Hebrew script by some). The New World Translation of the Bible by the Jehovah’s Witnesses is well known
for this practice as its prominent feature. Such a practice does have a merit on its own commended, however,
it is marred by other serious problems of the translation itself. Also their own principle of implementation is
not kept diligently (bordering frivolity) with the result to hamper acceptability and appreciation.

The sole need is to help read the text clearly without confusion and contradiction. His name is the most
important of all pertaining to God and the Bible. It is at the beginning and at the depth of all the prayers to
God (Mt 6:9). Without His name to be known and revealed there would be no kingdom reign of Elohim for
us; without His reign there would not be His will done on earth. The very name which represents His character
is to be revered, guarded and kept honored. Failing this is the most serious offence to God himself. No frivolity
should be tolerated; with linguistic and literary scrutiny any doctrinal and denominational agenda should be
exposed.

When His name is hidden away and remain obscured in the NT it does not help to purge confusion,
contradiction, and self-deception, mired in various theological, doctrinal, and ecclesiastical contentions and
objections. It is a distinctive feature of NWT, a translation by Jehovah’s Witnessesa. However, it is found to
be difficult to see its merit because of other associated problems with the translation. [Note: all the things
doctrinal and theological is of human product, hard to tell where the teaching in the Scripture (Word of God)
is alive to the truth.]

IRENT position is simpler – linguistic and literary scrutiny. The English word ‘Lord’ is one of the most
ambiguous, used in different meaning with different senses. The fatal problem is that it leads to referent
confusion, between Elohim the Most-High and His only-begotten Son, Yeshua, the risen Mashiah.

An English Bible translator today must communicate that same meaning to his English reading audience. What
and how did the inspired writers of the Scripture communicated to their intended readers? An English Bible
translator today must communicate that same to his English reading audience. A Bible is out of a human work
and the translation cannot be by itself the Word of God. [Cf. The issue of biblical inerrancy, biblical authority,
and sola scriptura. It is just for opening our eyes to go back to the (original) Scripture from which we can hear
it.]

Gk. anarthrous kurios as rendered as ‘Master’ ‘lord’ ‘Lord’, ‘Adonai’ or ‘YHWH’ (x: Jehovah): No one would
use or call even one’s own father’s name. Translation of His name should be only for the purpose of making
the name revealed and known. The Sacred Name should not be casually thrown in; cannot be treated in
frivolous way. The first thing in whatever we do is to keep His name honored and be sanctified. If we come
short of it, nothing else matters much. [Mt 6:9]

Group One: within the Greek text for direct OT quotation –it is straightforward, accurate and unambiguous,
except (in 2 places) where it comes of the mouth of the crowd, unthinkable to hear the sacred name – as well
attested by the tradition of Judaism.

a
Ref. Jason BeDuhn (2003), Truth in Translation pp. 168ff Appendix: The Use of ‘Jehovah’ in the NT. –
a copy is in IRENT Vol. III Supplement (Collection #3A).
Ref. Rolf Furuli (1999), The Role of Theology and Bias in Bible Translation: With a Special Look at the
New World Translation of Jehovah's Witnesses
[Cf. the expression ‘witness to YHWH’ found in OT refers to Israel as the nation, unrelated with the New
Testament.]
336
Group Two: (1) the context is tied to OT setting for the anarthrous kurios, often in genitive: E.g. aggelos kurio
– IRENT renders it ‘angels of Adonai’, not as ‘angel of YHWH’, or ‘angel of the Lord’.
(2) Hebrew fixed phrase for the Most-High esp. in Revelation – ‘YWHW El Shaddai’ ( > Lord Got the
Almighty).

Group Three: the referent in the text is ambiguous as to Elohim vs. Mashiah. However, these examples are
rather small in number. Here NWT tends to render it as ‘Jehovah’.

[Table data – edited from www.htmlbible.com/sacrednamebiblecom/about.htm

OT Hebrew text == Adonai YHWH

OT KJV = Lord GOD

NT Greek text = Kurios
NT KJV = Lord
IRENT = Adonai YHWH

Old Testament Verse New Testament Quote

Isa 10:23 (Rm 9:28)

Isa 25:8 (Rev 7:17)
Isa 61:1 (Lk 4:18)

OT Hebrew text == YHWH

OT KJV == LORD
NT Greek text == Kurios
NT KJV = Lord
IRENT = YHWH

Old Testament Verse (New Testament Quote)

YHWH the LORD, the Lord < YHWH

Gen 15:6 (Rm 4:3; Gal 3:6; Jam 2:23)

Exo 24:8 (Heb 9:20)
Num 16:5 (2Tm 2:19)
Deu 6:4 (Mk 12:29)
Deu 6:5 (Mt 22:37; Mk 12:30; Lk 10:27)
Deu 6:13 (Mt 4:10; Lk 4:8)
Deu 6:16 (Mt 4:7; Lk 4:12)
Deu 8:3 (Mt 4:4; Lk 4:4)
Deu 18:15 (Acts 3:22)
Deu 32:35, 36 (Rm 12:19; Heb 10:30)
1Kg 19:10 (Rm 11:3)
Psa 2:2 (Acts 4:26)
Psa 16:8 (Acts 2:25)
Psa 24:1 (1Co 10:26)
Psa 34:15,16 (1Pe 3:12)
Psa 94:11 (1Co 3:20)
Psa 110:1 (Mt 22:44; Mk 12:36; Lk 20:42;
Acts 2:34)
Psa 110:4 (Heb 7:21)
337
 Psa 117:1 (Rm 15:11)
Psa 118:6 (Heb 13:6)
Psa 118:23 (Mt 21:42; Mark 12:11)
Psa 118:26 (Mt 23:39; Lk 13:35)@
@ Mt 21:9; Mk 11:9; 19:38; Jn 12:13 ‘Rendered it because the word
'Adonai' as it was from the crowd’s shouting, rather than direct quotation.

Pro 3:11, 12 (Heb 12:5, 6)

Pro 3:33, 34 (Jam 4:6; 1Pe 5:5)
Isa 1:9 (Rm 9:29)
Isa 8:13 (1Pe 3:15)
Isa 8:18 (Heb 2:13)
Isa 28:11-13 (1Co 14:21)
Isa 29:10 (Rm 11:8)
Isa 40:3 (Mt 3:3; Lk 3:4; Jn 1:23)
Isa 40:5 (Lk 3:6)
Isa 40:13 (Rm 11:34)
Isa 40:13, 14 (1Co 2:16)
Isa 41:4, 8 (Jam 2:23)
Isa 52:11 (2Co 6:17)
Isa 53:1 (Jn 12:38; Rm 10:16)
Isa 54:13 (Jn 6:45)
Isa 61:1 (Lk 4:18)
Isa 61:2 (Lk 4:19)
Jer 9:23,24 (1Co 1:31)
Jer 31:31-34 (Heb 8:8-12)
Jer 31:33 (Heb 10:16)
Eze 36:20 (Rm 2:24)
Joel 2:31 (Act 2:20)
Joel 2:32 (Act 2:21; Rm 10:13)
Amos 9:12 (Act 15:17)

Names-titles-and-characters-of-jesus-christ

www.blueletterbible.org/study/parallel/paral19.cfm [A file in the Collection]

[OT & NT mixed] for Trinitarians who worship Jesus God.]

338
 PART IV. On Trinity

On *Trinity and *Trinitarianism

Vocabulary, lingo, jargon: – words, phrases, terms need to be created or defined to make some
sense, if any, of Trinity doctrine.

'one' 'compound one' 'not three but one' 'Godhead' 'God' 'Father' 'Son' 'spirit' 'holy spirit' 'person' vs.
'Person', 'personality', 'three', 'triad', 'trinity', 'Trinity', 'the Trinity' 'essence' 'substance' 'ousia';
'hypostasis', 'nature', 'Trinity God'; 'Trinitarianism' – most of them are non-biblical or not biblically
exclusive.

Note: the language of Trinity is based on Latin, which has no grammatical article. E.g. no different
in God and the God in Latin, whereas the distinction

*Triadic phrases – mistaken as Trinity phrases for use as proof-texts of Trinity Doctrine:

• Mt 28:19b “Immersing them; into the name of the Father and the Son and the holy spirit …"
• 2Co 13:14 "The divine grace through the Lord Yeshua the Mashiah and the Love from
Elohim and the fellowship [of Life] in the holy spirit be with yoů all."
• 1Jn 5:7 " … in heaven the Father, the Word, and the holy spirit, and these three are one [in
testimony] …"

[See collections on 'Trinity']

Quote for kindle book page:

"… Thus, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are in the same God state. They have the same
essence, attributes, power, and privileges.
In essence, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are the same. All three are spirit. All three
are the Word. … " Larum (2018), Wind, Water, and Fire: Understanding the Holy
Spirit through Biblical Symbolism. [Confusion galore on the triad of Father, Son, and
Holy Spirit. Is it a variant of unitarian idea? – ARJ]

Ref. Hurtado (1998, 2nd Ed), One God, One Lord - Early Christian Devotion and Ancient Jewish Monotheism
Ref. Trinity (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
[a copy for each – in <IRENT Vol. III - Supplement (Collections #3A.2 - on Trinity)>

Music and Theology (www.gci.org/_lib/playvideo.php?program=YI/YI137)

Dr. Jeremy Begbie shares his thoughts on the unique powers of music and how they enrich our
understanding of theology. (8:01 minutes)

[He mentions ‘Trinity’, but the concept is not needed for his writing. E.g. the Holy Ghost is not needed
to follow the Father-Son relation and how we understand it.

339
 Trinity 101:
• Did ‘Jesus’ talk to, pray to, praise, and worship ‘God the Holy Ghost’?
• Did ‘God the Holy Ghost’ talk to, ask, pray to, praise and worship God the
Father?
• Did ‘God the Holy Ghost’ talk, pray to, worship, or praise ‘God the Son’?
• If they are ‘unity’, then they don’t have to do such things?
• Did ‘God the Holy Ghost’ give the gift of holy spirit to the Disciples at
Pentecost? Was it God Father? Or ‘God the Son’ also?
• How do we pray to Father differently to ‘God the Son’, and differently to
Yeshua, and differently to ‘God Holy Ghost’? Or is it same? Pray in the name
of God the Father? Pray in the name of ‘God the Holy Ghost’; or pray in the
name of Yeshua, as Yeshua himself told to so? What is ‘prayer’ anyway?
• How come they did not bother the Holy Ghost is a person at the time of Council
of Nicaea? Not matured enough to be called until Council of Constantinople?
• Where did they get the images/icons of three-faced Trinity; three-headed
Trinity,a in addition to three human figures at the table (painting of ‘Trinity’ by
Rublev)?
• "Three persons are one God"?? – What does it mean by or refer to 'God'?
• 'The Holy Ghost' (Holy Spirit) – is not 'God', but 'of God'. It is not a person. It is
not 'he'; it is 'it'. Something in personification is not to be confused with it's
personhood (x: personality).

Trinitarian jargons have anything to do with Biblical truth?

"In the unity of this Godhead, there are three persons of one individual essence

The phrase three persons comes from the Greek word that is used at that time: hypostases,
actual personalities or persons.

There are three hypostases, but there is one individual essence: homoousios, one substance."
– attributed to Athanasius.

Analogy galore for the Trinity, like an egg, or a three-leaf clover. However, when you think
about essence, and three distinct things at the same time, consider water, ice, and vapor.
They’re all three H20, all one essence, but they’re just three different forms.

From www.patheos.com/blogs/jaredingle/2018/06/the-trinity-recognizing-beauty-in-
doctrine/

"Three does not mean three, one does not mean one, and person does not mean person." Bishop
David Jenkins, an Oxford sermon on the Trinity [Quoted in O'Collins (1999), The tripersonal
God: understanding and interpreting the Trinity (in Introduction)]
www.scribd.com/doc/315857695/The-Tripersonal-God-Understanding-and-Interpreting-the-
Trinity-Gerald-O-Collins-SJ

a
(a diabolic iconography) http://pendientedemigracion.ucm.es/centros/cont/descargas/documento18788.pdf
Three-Headed Trinity or Three-Faced Trinity
340
The propositional statements of Trinity doctrine. We find no definition whatsoever given to
any word appearing in the statements. 'Father' – What is father? 'Son' – What is 'Son'? What
Son? God – what is God? What God? Which God? Whose God? Person – what is 'person'?
When a human being is not a human person? 'Holy Spirit' – what is 'holy'? What is 'spirit'?
What spirit? Which spirit? "Trinity God" – another god other than three Gods (Father God,
Son God, Holy Ghost God)?

Implication of Trinity – Is Father worshipped and prayed to? Is Son worshipped and prayed to? Is
the Holy Spirit worshipped and prayed? What is prayed for? What does it mean to worship? Each
of three Persons does different things? Sits on a separate throne? Does things different way? How
different? At different time? For different things? How and when do they ‘communicate’? Are there
as in the picture of three ‘persons’ in the heavenly realm – each sitting on its own throne (tri-theism)
at one table? Or as in the image of one person with three heads? Or as in the icon of a three-faced
head? The three are to be equal – equal of what? Equal size, glory? Equal power? God the Father
has power, and God the Son has power, and God the Holy Ghost has power? What power? Same
power? Different power? Same power tapped by each for one’s own use and purpose?

[See a file in IRENT Vol. III. Supplement – Collections #3A.2 – On Trinity.]

Related words – Nicene Creed, Arianism, Modalism (Sabellianism, Noetianism, Patripassianism),

Docetism, Tritheism, Adoptionism, Partialism, Macedonianism, Trinitarianism, etc.
[http://lifeinchristministries.com/daily-teachings/archives/teachings.php?id=82 Trinitarian
Heresies: Part 1 to 9]

Tertullian, Origen, Arius, Athanasius, St. Augustine; /Praxeas /Sabellius

Cf. triad, triadic, ternary – pattern, formula, expression

Cf. ‘binitarian (binarian; bitarian)’ vs. ‘dyadic’

[ https://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2012/09/10/binitarian-dyadic-triadic-early-christian-god-talk-and-
devotion/ “Binitarian,” “Dyadic,” “Triadic”: Early Christian God-talk and Devotion]

Cf. Concepts of nature (divine vs. human) – what is 'nature'? 'divine nature' is only in a God?
Cf. Concept of 'will' (divine vs. human): 'divine will' cannot be in a human?
Cf. Concept of 'essence' (divine vs. human)
Cf. concept of ‘worship’ and ‘devotion’ (at to a God-figure).
Cf. Concept of ‘God’, ‘Godhead’, ‘deity’; ‘divine person’ 'divinity'; meaning of '(being) divine'. God, god,
a god, the God, gods, (pagan) gods; Elohim, elohim, el.
Cf. Terms – Latin tinitas (Tertullian c. 155 – c. 240 CE) Gk. triados (Theophilus of Antioch ca 170 CE) –
used in the sense of triad or tri-unity, not the concept of ‘trinity’ (as in the creed at the Council of
Constantinople). The word ‘trinity’ in Athanasian Creed in Latin (298 - 373 CE). “3. … the That we
worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; …ut unum Deum in Trinitate, et Trinitatem in Unitate
veneremur www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/creeds2.iv.i.iv.html -- what does it mean by 'trinity' here in Latin
phrase?
[Trinitarian incongruous claims in their perplexity and complexity of its creedal system: Father is God; Son
is God; and Holy Ghost (Spirit) is God, but there is only on God. Jesus is God – fully God and fully Man –

341
fully divine and fully human. a However as Father is God, the Son is as God. "Jesus is God" but it can only
in the sense of "Jesus is as God". If Father is God and Son is as God; they are not same. Son is subordinate,
Son has a beginning. Son who does not have beginning is a fictional being.]

The Logos in Jn 1:1, which is the word of Elohim ('the Word of God'), is claimed to be God person, God
the Son, pre-existing Jesus, eternal Jesus, Christ (whatever it means, but not same as Messiah or Mashiah);
'Cosmic Christ' (whatever it means), etc.

They do not define ‘Father’ (– what is and who is), nor ‘Son’ (– what is and who is), in other than in circular
illogicity. Nor they do know what spirit is, and what holy spirit is. The call them persons, without giving
what the term means; they concocted the pompous sounding Greek metaphyseal philosophical vague
technical abstract undefinable, beyond-logic terms – ousia, hypostasis – to Latin persona (‘actors in
drama’). They assert that Jesus is a human being but not a ‘human person’, but a ‘divine person’. Three is
one – what they call ‘mystery of Trinity’. How is ‘trinity’ used – a doctrine or God itself as Trinitarian
God?] [Only a few misinterpreted Bible verses in eisegesis they fall back in futile attempt to prove Jesus is
God and the God of Yeshua is Himself compound one made of two or three (even asserting that ‘Jewish
Trinity’ is to be found in OT texts).

Trinity lingo

1. 'Trinity God': one 'God' in three 'persons' (– each person co-eternal, co-essential, co-equal, of
eternal generation – in their union each nature preserves its distinction in nature – 'oneness of
God'. (what is 'person' -- 'faces' 'role' 'model' in Latin?) (What is 'God'? How many gods?)
2. 'Christ' – dual natures of 'Christ'; in one person 'Christ', there exists two wills, both divine and
human that never conflict (– what is referred to 'Christ'? Another name, but not Messiah?);

Cf. Yeshua carried Father's will and was Father's glory.

a
Fully – what does it mean by 'fully'? Fully divine, not partly divine? Fully human, not partly divine? E.g.
'fully pregnant' – does it ever make sense?
342
[End of the File]

343
1
Human being vs. human person – person vs. being; Person vs. person:

Ref. Adrian Thatcher, Truly a Person, Truly God (Ch. 7 Person, nature and Man, p. 80.)
“… the most contentious element of incarnational doctrine, viz. that Christ, the divine
Person, had a human nature but lacked, or was not, a human person. Rather he became
‘man’, but the subject of his human nature, like that of his divine nature, was the divine
Person of the Son. God the Son is a metaphysical Person whose divine nature becomes
perfectly united to a human nature. There is one Person not two, and there are two
natures, not one. In what sense, then, is a Jesus a human person? …”
2
“Non-human person”? An article in www.reuters.com Captive orangutan has human right to freedom,
Argentine court rules

3
Eerdmans Bible Dictionary p. 747

Significance of Name: Because of the vitality ascribed to words, a name signifies first and
foremost existence. Everything and everyone have a name (Eccl 6:10), and the very
naming brings them into being (Isa 40:26; cf. Gen 2:19). The name represents the person
(Num 1:2; cf. Act 1:15, KN; RSV "persons") and the personality (e.g., Nabal, "fool"; 1Sam
25:25). Because a name is a social reality, kept by memory and through posterity (cf. Psa
72:17), to cut off a person's name means not only death but the very obliteration of one's
existence (e.g., 1Sam 24:21 [MT 22]; Psa 9:5 [MT 6]; 109:13).

The name conveys the authority of the person even when absent. To speak or act in
another's name is to participate in that person's authority (1Sam 17:45; 25:9; Act 4:7). The
principle is that of prophecy and revelation (Exo 3:13-14; Deu 18:19; Jn 5:43). God's name
reveals his character and salvation in which people may take refuge (Psa 20:1 [MT 2]; cf.
Isa 25:1; 56:6); to treat God's name as empty is to despise his person (Exo 20:7). Similarly,
to act in the name of Christ is to participate in his authority (Act 3:6; 1Co 5:4; 2The 3:6;
Jas 5:14) as well as to share in his contempt (Lk 21:12-19; Act 5:41). Elsewhere the name
of Christ stands for the whole of his salvation (4:7; 1Co 6:11).

To bestow a name is an act of authority, denoting possession, responsibility, and protection for some
person or object (2Sam 12:28; Psa 49:11; Isa 4:1). The naming of creation is thus an exercise of
dominion, part of the "image of God" (Gen 2:19-20; cf. 1:28). Changes of name confer new status,
either greater or lesser (32:28; 2Kg 24:17). Similarly, baptism into (Gk. eis) Christ's name signifies
a new status, from death into life (Rm 6:2ff.), and a new Lord (1Co 1:2). Believers are not given a
new name, but bear Christ's name (Act 11:26; 1Pe 4:16; Rev 14:1); their names are known by God
(13:8).

4
“A Study on Jn 20:28” – Thomas addressed to the Risen Yeshua, “ho kurios mou kai ho theos
mou!”, usu. translated as ‘My Lord and My God’. Even though it was in post-resurrection setting
Gk ‘kurios’ (nominative as vocative for exclamation) should still have the same nuance carried by
‘Master’, a translation word in IRENT for Greek word used as to Yeshua (sames as Jn 20:25 by
Mariam the Magdalene). That the word should now be used as if for a divine person (not ‘divine
God’) is linguistically constrained and surely from eisegesis. As for the phrase ‘ho theos’, the text
is read by the Trinitarian mind that here ‘Jesus was called God’. Rendered in consistent manner
344
throughout NT, IRENT reads ‘my Master and my Elohim [the Father]!’ with intra-text expansions.
Thomas now encounterd his Master, now risen, and through Him, he encounters the presence of
Elohim, who is with His people (Immanuel), in the person of Yeshua (‘salvation’ from Elohim). The
risen Yeshua Mashiah, exalted to the right of Elohm, is the Lord (Phi 2:11 = Heb. Adon; not Adonai
as translated wrongly in CJB.)
5
A case study for translating the very common Greek word kurios in NT. (See Lk
4:18-19)

The text in Lk 4:18-19 ('spirit of Adonai … 'jubilee year of Adonai' – IRENT) in the voice
of Yeshua reading from Torah. In Isa 61:1 we have pneuma kuriou in LXX (same in GNT)
which is Adonai YHWH in MT text. In Isa 61:2a we have eniauton kuriou dekton in LXX
(and GNT), which is ‫‘נת ָרצ ליהוָה‬Jubilee year of YHWH. From the fact that the Greek word
is in anarthrous genitive as ‘LORD’, not as ‘the Lord’, and from the text context itself, it is
the word for YHWH. – correct and accurate, no one can argue about.

However, the question for translators is this – is it right one for the purpose of translation?
What is served and who is served by a particular translation? The fact is, a translation work
is not just a scholarly work to serve the writer more than the readers. When a Bible
translation work has its intended audience as wide as possible [both within and without a
religion] only the Scripture-based linguistic and literary approach is a valid one. When it is
to serve a limited audience as an officially-sanctioned 'canonical' 'authorized' translation in
a language, presenting for a denominational or sectarian use, it is obvious that something
other than clearly presented it the Scripture is in their agenda, further away from the Truth.
On top of it, they would certainly claim that how such a work is most correct and accurate!

In the particular text of Luke, GNT is quoting the text in TaNaKh from LXX, not Hebrew
text. Yeshua was reading from the scroll in Hebrew in the synagogue at the very beginning of
Yeshua’s ministry. [This by itself, however, would not prove or indicate that Yeshua
pronounce the name of God.]

Now, what is a right and appropriate rendering is entirely dependent on how the message is
communicated from the source to the target. We have to pay attention not just to what the source
could have been correctly, but how it was delivered the audience (here the people of Nazareth) in
speech and then how it is to be delivered to the readers in translation. How does ‘YHWH’ (or
whatever of its transcription scheme) in translation help this communication line – the line to transmit
the truth, not the idea or mindset and agenda of a translator? Does the text indicate that Yeshua set
out to remind people it was as YHWH that they should know the divine name, as if He was pointing
out how they were ignorant of it, or negligent to keep pronouncing it, or superstitious about uttering
it? Or, are we to buy some claim that “in many places the GNT text is corrupt [sic]”. [Never mind
that the term ‘corrupt’ in the textual criticism is in a special sense and is not what the word means in
common English parlance.]

On the other hand, it does not help have it as ‘the Lord’ as in most English translations, simply
because it fails to clearly communicate to the readers. Indeed, this word is not only used as a title for
YHWH Elohim, but also for Yeshua the Messiah, not mentioning that it is also any ordinary man
(used in the sense of master or owner in the Scripture, as well as or a person of special position in
modern UK). “[God Himself] has bestowed on His Messiah the very name, the name
above every name, that at the very name Yeshua everyone shall kneel — those in
heaven, on earth, and under the earth, and everyone shall openly confess that
Yeshua the Messiah is ‘Lord’ to the glory of Elohim the Father.” – (Phi 2:9-11). Elohim
Himself does not require us to kneel down at His name YHWH, but at the name of Yeshua, His Son.
No one would keep uttering one’s father’s name on every conceivable occasion – in the oriental
345
 mindset. Such a thing may be conceivable only from the logical western mindset with grammatical
and quasi-scholarly precision and doctrinal agenda. [E.g. Look at NWT – it has ‘Jehovah’ in NT over
230 places! (Everything would look like a bone for the dog intent on looking for a bone!) What else
can be a better example for frivolous and irreverent to His name?]

6
YHWH in LXX translation:

Ref. W. G. Waddell, The Tetragrammaton in the LXX, JTS 45 (1944) 158-161. (NOTES AND
STUDIES.)

(p. 161) “… The question remains: at the service in a Hellenistic synagogue what did the
reader of this papyrus roll utter instead of the sacred name which he might not say aloud?
Either, in keeping with the Greek context, he would recite Kyrios or, like any reader of the
Hebrew OT, he would say Adonai (Lord): in the time of St. Jerome (…) ignorant readers,
taking it to be a Greek word, actually pronounced it 'Pipi'!” [? – written as PIPI, but actually
pronounced? – ARJ]

1
[A dog can smell of food whenever it comes upon something which looks like a bone.]
www.tomorrowsworld.org/commentary/criticism-of-the-bible

There is no issue with an approach of “proving” the Bible. In 1Thessalonians 5:21, it

says to “Prove all things” (KJV). The problem is in the attitude and approach. If the
mind is already made up, the approach is to prove what is already preconceived. In
psychology, this is called “confirmation bias.” Ambiguous evidence may be viewed
as supportive of the preconception, and other evidence is discounted because it isn’t
supportive of the preconception. Facts are interpreted with greater weight arbitrarily
given to those that support the predetermined conclusion. This is called the
“irrational primacy effect”.

Another psychological principle is called the “*illusory correlation.” Events are

perceived to be related, when in reality they are not. As the old sayings go: “If you
look for trouble, you’ll find it”; and, “You will find what you are looking for.” In
other words, the critic may be biased toward confirming his or her own existing belief
rather than discovering the truth.

Numerous psychological experiments have found that people selectively collect

evidence. They look for evidence that supports their hypotheses and existing beliefs
or assumptions. They are biased in their search for information and in their
interpretation of it. Evidence that goes against the belief or hypothesis is subjected to
a higher standard than evidence that is favorable. And evidence is also subject to
selective memory. And, amazingly, even hypotheses that are completely discredited
may continue to persist in the mind. It is well established that human reasoning, even
of a “higher critic,” is fallible. What we think we know may not be so.

2
www.philosophy-index.com/nietzsche/god-is-dead/

346
 Friedrich Nietzsche, German philosopher, has his famous declaration ‘Gott ist tot" (God
is dead) several times throughout his works.

The meaning of the phrase is often misunderstood — many have interpreted that
Nietzsche believed in a literal death or end of God. Instead, the line points to the western
world’s reliance on religion as a moral compass and source of meaning. As he explains in
Die fröhliche Wissenschaft (Section 125, The Madman):
“God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort
ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all
that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe
this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of
atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this
deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear
worthy of it?”

Nietzsche’s works express a fear that the decline of religion, the rise of atheism, and the
absence of a higher moral authority would plunge the world into chaos. The western world
had depended on the rule of God for thousands of years — it gave order to society and
meaning to life. Without it, Nietzsche writes, society will move into an age of nihilism.
Although Nietzsche may have been considered a nihilist by definition, he was critical of
it and warned that accepting nihilism would be dangerous.

Nietzsche’s statement prompted several replies from his more religious opponents, and
from later existentialists. Albert Camus, for example, considered the human need for
higher order absurd. He argued that the “death” of God was inconsequential—that
humanity had no need of a higher authority or the threat of divine wrath to live a good
and moral life. Some other philosophers were less prepared to part with the concept of
higher authority and instead tried to imagine an absolute morality that didn’t depend on a
supreme being.
The following are a list of occurrences of the "god is dead" statement in Nietzsche's work:
• (1882) Die fröhliche Wissenschaft (‘Cheerful Science’) in Sections 108, 125 and
343. Ideas such as the "eternal recurrence of the same", the parable on the
"death of God", and the "prophecy" the "prophecy" of the Übermensch, were
first introduced in this work.
• (1883) Also sprach Zarathustra: Ein Buch für Alle und Keinen (‘Thus Spoke
Zarathustra: A Book for All and None’) in Prologue and XXV.

What was meant by 'God'? What God? Which God? Whose God? A god which lived once
but now dead? Of course, we can say their God is not Elohim the Most-High. It is not
much different than any pagan god. The truth is 'God' for most is nothing other than one's
self, who has the 'knowledge of right and wrong', not the 'knowledge of good and evil' as
most translate in Gen 2:10.

3
From Anton LaVey (1969), Satanic Bible
www.thesatanicbiblefree.com/files/Download/The%20Satanic%20Bible%20Ebook.pdf

Book II. The Book of Lucifer,

(p. 40)
It is a popular misconception that the Satanist does not believe in God. The concept of
"God", as interpreted by man, has been so347
varied throughout the ages, that the Satanist
 simply accepts the definition which suits him best. Man has always created his gods,
rather than his gods creating him. God is, to some, benign - to others, terrifying. To the
Satanist "God" - by whatever name he is called, or by no name at all - is seen as the
balancing factor in nature, and not as being concerned with suffering. This powerful
force which permeates and balances the universe is far too impersonal to care about
the happiness or misery of flesh-and-blood creatures on this ball of dirt upon which we
live.

4
‘*gods’ in plural:
‘gods’ (in plural): Jn 10:34, 35; Act 7:40; 14:11, 12; 19:26; 1Co 8:5; Gal 4:8;
[Cf. In common English usage, ‘gods’ (uncapitalized) usually connotes
gods in paganism.] Likewise, ‘god’ (in singular) may be applied to a
human. [See ‘my Elohim’ in Jn 20:17 vs. 20:28.]

Not to be confused with

eidolon 1Jn 5:21; (idols, false-gods); 1Co 8:7; /statue of gods – NIrV; /
daimonion Act 17:18; (deities) /x: gods
Dioskouroi Act 28:11; (Castor and Pollux, twin-gods of Greek mythology)
deisidaimonesteros Act 17:22; ‘awed by deities’ (religious)

Note: The Scripture does not say ‘there is only one God’, which is what
‘monotheism’ is. There are many gods. People of Elohim believes in One God –
monolatry or mon(o)altruism but not henotheism.

[this word may be rendered as ‘(false) mighty ones’ – e.g. HalleluYah Scripture (Exo 23:13; Jos 23:7)]

The Scripture does not say there is only one God. It tells there are many – that’s where the problem of
human beings lies, since by nature they are born god-seekers and god-worshipers. So-called Monotheism
is belief in one and only God, not belief that there is only one. Some try to see it different from henotheism
or monolatry, but it seems to have not substance.

1Co 8:5-6
8:5
Yes, if indeed there are so-called ‘gods’
whether in heaven or on earth,
((as there [really] are even many such ‘gods’
and many such ‘lords’)), [cf. Gal 4:8; Deu 10:17]
8:6
but to us there is one God — the Father, {☼Mal 2:10}
☼

out of whom all things are and we are for Him,

and one Lord — Yeshua the Messiah,
through whom all things are and we are through him. [Rm 11:36]

Deu 10:17

"YHWH your Elohim is God of gods and Lord of lords".

Hebrew: "Ki YHWH Eloheichem Hoe Elohei ha'elohim v'adonei ha'adonim"
literally: For YHWH your God He God of the gods and Lord of the lords

Jn 10:34, 35 (gods) //Ps 82:6 (elohim)

10:34
Yeshua answered them, 348
 “Is it not written in the Torah yoů have with yoů, this way?
<I myself have said, declaring that
yoů all [judges] are [to rule] as ‘elohim’.> {Psa 82:6; cf. Psa 82:1}
10:35
Here, those to whom these words came from the very Elohim
are referred as ‘elohim’
— yes, this scripture passage cannot be pushed aside!

Ex 23:13 "Make no bring out (/x: invoke; /> mention) the names of other gods, neither let
them be heard out of your mouth."

Every idol or god may have a personal NAME - and it is the bringing out these NAMES that is
forbidden, as in worshiping, promoting, or getting involved with.

Cf. www.revelations.org.za/Elohim.htm (God or Elohim)

https://yrm.org/elohim-proper-pagan/

Pagan gods/idols: named in NT

Act 7:43 Molock (/Molekh); Remphan (/Rephan) [See EE here4]

Act 19:24, 27, 34, 35 Artemis (Greek goddess) [ = Roman goddess Diana]
Act 19:35 Zeus
Act 28:11 Dioscuri [Gk. Dioskouroi. ‘twin’ gods (cf. Consternation Gemini), Castor and
Pollux, reported to be the sons of Jupiter and Leda.]

5
"God is dead" (‘Gott ist tot’ in German; also known as ‘the death of God’):

A phrase in Die fröhliche Wessenschaft (Hegel 1882); Nietzsche in Also sprach Zarathustra
(Nietzsche 1883), etc.

[A quotable: “Today's radical theologians argue that the "death of God" frees us for the world
and for the neighbor.” quoted from Stanley R. Moore (1969), ‘Religion as the True Humanism:
Reflections on Kierkegaard’s Social Philosophy’ in J. Am Acad Religion
http://jaar.oxfordjournals.org/content/XXXVII/1/15.full.pdf+html. Yeah, it frees us to throw
into the very slavery of man, indeed.]

[If one defines God as something immortal, the God who is claimed to be dead (or rather put to death) is
not ‘God’, but their god. They want to see God of others to be dead or to disappear from human
consciousness. They simply forgot that when their god is dead, there is God still alive and working hard
– their ‘own Self’ to whom they are ferously serving till their own death.]

Cf. ‘Unknowable God’ – is logically excluded from any God notion. The God of the Scripture
is a Self-revealing God; not a God-being which humans come to know through one’s mental
power and ‘enlightment’ process.
6
;-<
The name YHWH bears no resemblance whatsoever to the English generic words 'LORD'
or 'God' which aren't even names but titles.

That would be a bit like calling King David as 'Czar', the Russian for a King or an
Emperor. You would never guess who 'Czar' was because the original name would have
been mutilated beyond recognition. There have
349
been many Russian Czars so which one
 would 'Czar' be referring to? You might be shocked to learn that the Russian 'Czar' comes
from the Latin (Roman) 'Caesar’, and that 'Caesar' was simply the last name of a man
called Julius Caesar (the first Roman Emperor). That might not bother you too much until
you learned that the Latin caesar means ‘hairy'. You might, upon learning that, not be so
flattered when someone called you, 'O mighty Hairy One'!
[quoted from an article “The Divine Name YHWH - How is It Properly Pronounced”
(www.nccg.org/644Art-YHWH.html )

7
‘Elohim’ instead of ‘God’ for the arthrous ho theos (‘the God’) – two special places to
consider upon:

• In Jn 20:28 the phrase ‘ho kurios mou kai ho theos mou’. (‘the Lord of me and the God of
me’) (‘My Lord and my Elohim’ – IRENT). Most renders as ‘My Lord and my God’. IRENT
renders as it renders the arthrous ho theos here also as ‘Elohim’ as it is done consistently
throughout the entire NT translation. The phrase should be read with linguistic, literary, and
logical approach. Most often it is read as a code which is to be deciphered with theological
and doctrinal interpretation. Translation should not follow theology. Theology itself should
follow a translation faithful to the Greek text.
It was Thomas’ exclamation he uttered as he realized whom he was confronted by – not a
confession of his ‘faith’, as if ‘Jesus, once as God-man, but now as God’. In nominative, not
vocative, the two phrases are connected by KAI which can be additive here, not appositive.
The first phrase: ‘Oh Master¡ you’re truly the Lord I have known.’
The second phrase: ‘Here my Elohim is with you’. Thomas does not mean ‘Yeshua is now God, not
just a man once He was’. He is not referring the risen Yesua as YHWH Elohim, nor calling out to the
God as with vocative, but the reality of Elohim he is experiencing in the person of the risen Lord, as
he was confronted by.

• In Heb 1:8 the phrase ‘ho thronos sou, ho theos eis ton aiōna tou aiōnos’. (1) “Your throne,
O God, is forever and ever” – most (KJV – ‘Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever’), vs.
(2) ‘God is your throne’ (NET mg, and NWT in NT and OT).
(3) IRENT renders as ‘Your throne, Elohim, into the aeon to aeon.’.
(4) If a verb is made explicit, ‘Elohim is your throne’. [To bypass the two alternative
controversial readings of the text, IRENT takes Elohim as appositive, not exclamatory or
vocative with Elohim being the One who establishes the throne for His Son. For formal
equivalence it is closer to the Greek syntax.] [throne - metonymic for the Kingdom reign
of the Son, established by Elohim.]

In these two particular places, ‘theos’ is often taken as if the title ‘God’ is applied to the risen
Lord Yeshua. The Trinitarian doctrine tries to read these texts to prove that ‘Christ = God’.
However, by consistently rendering Gk. ho theos as Elohim, these exegetically controversial
texts deserve a refreshed look for understanding the text in the context and interpreting it in
harmony with the whole Scripture.

8
‘Elohim’, ‘the God’ vs. ‘God’ in Korean language: In Korean translations, the traditional word
‘하나님’ (ha-na-nim > ‘하나’ means ‘one’) has been exclusive for the God in the Scripture. In some
newer translations by Catholics, it is replaced with ‘하느님’ (ha-neu-nim, with ‘하느’ from ‘하늘’
meaning ‘heaven’ ‘sky’). from their traditional ‘천주(天主) 님’ meaning ‘heavenly Lord’, similar to
Chinese ‘Shangdi’ 上帝 (상제). In Korean culture it is a generic god (신, 神, a common native (sky)-
god. Cf. ‘ghost’ 귀신 鬼神). It is apparently not on linguistic or theological ground, but from purely
350
polemic-political stance with a need of being different from the Protestant tradition. The two words,
however, are found to provide a solution in a fresh translation. The first fits well for ‘the God’ (‘Elohim’);
the latter for ‘God’. Another option for ‘God’ as in the sense of ‘God-being’ is ‘’하나님되시다. [It is one
word. This should not to be confused with a verbal phrase ‘하나님이 ’되시다 (becomes God), though
the postfix is derived from the verb ‘to become’ itself.]
[Note that in ‘하나님’ and ‘하느님’, one syllable difference with 나 (‘na) and 느 (‘neu’), evolved
from a now extinct vowel sound (represented by a dot to be placed below the consonant). The vowel
sound for the latter is ɯ in IPA notation. It is absent in English language. Cf. 님 ‘nim’ is honorific
post-script is not optional but essential to use.]

9
God as Father

[Needs Editing]

*Father; *Fatherhood

Father as to Elohim in OT:

Deu 32:6; Isa 63:16a; 64:8 (‘You, O YHWH, are our Father’); Jer 3:4, 19 (call ~ to me ‘My
Father’); Jer 31:9 (a Father to Israel); Mal 2:10 (all have one father – one God); Psa 89:26
Or the Father of His son/sons (2Sam 7:14; 1Chr 17:13; 22:10; 28:6; Psa 68:5; Mal 1:6).
At times the father imagery is present although the term "Father" is not used (‘as to his son or
sons) [Exo 4:22-23; Deu 1:31; 8:5; 14:1; Psalm 103:13; Jer 3:22; 31:20; Hosea 11:1; Mal 3:17].

In the whole Scripture, the Aramaic word abba (meaning father9) to address Elohim is only in
Greek NT in the phrase ‘abba, pater’ with Gk. pater as its translation word – Mk 14:36 (from the
lips of Yeshua); Rm 8:16; Gal 4:6.

Yeshua addressed YHWH Elohim as ‘(my) Father’; referring to their (‘your’) Father He taught
His discples to address their Father as ‘Our Father’ – Mt 6:9.
Over 40x in Pauline Epistles, Elohim is addressed to ‘Father’. Also in 1Pe 1:3; 1Jn 3:1

God as Father

In Lord’s prayer, Yeshua told the disciples to call their God

‘Father!’ (Lk 11:2);
‘Father, O our heavenly Father’ (//Mt 6:9)

‘Father’ as to Elohim is an anthropomorphic term reflecting special relationality of Elohim with

Yeshua – also introduced to us by Yeshua Himself. It is not a gender-related, biological-social
construct. [Note unscriptural statement: “God is a Spirit (Jn 4:24 KJV) without sexual parts.” –
Elohim is not a spirt, nor a Spirit; ‘God is a Spirit’ is a serious blunder in KJV translation.
‘Elohim is Spirit’. ‘without sexual parts’ is a frivolous statement.]

[‘Abba’ in Aramaic, the everyday language at the time of Yeshua – as in addressing God as
‘Abba Father!’ (Mk 14:36; Gal 4:6; Rm 8:15b) with a word picture of authority, warmth,
and intimacy of a loving father’s care. (The expression Abba does not mean something like
‘daddy’.)] [Only those who are privileged to have become children of God (Jn 1:12) can call
Him Father, as He is Father to Yeshua. Prayer is their privilege and life-line; and He hears
them all the time. So-called ‘Universal Fatherhood of God’ is an unscriptural concept.] [Cf.
351
That one is a child of God, such a person is a child of God forever. One does not have to work
to be such a child – contra legalism.]

[Father! – it is not just of calling (addressing) Him, but confessing (acknowledgment)

that we are His children, a privilege God gave to become to those becoming to believe
in His Son (Jn 1:12).]

[Fatherhood of God. Not anthropomorphism or projection of an image after human

fathers, but from Him true fatherhood comes. Nor it is ‘Universal Fatherhood of God’.
Rather than He is of ours (as if in possession) but God comes to us as Father, as He is
to Yeshua. He is the One who, in His love, sent His son to the world to be crucified.
He is to be called as Father not by imitation or by analogy, but by invitation of Yeshua
to those who have become children of God.]

[Alford – p. 60
pater hēmōn – this was a form of address almost unknown to the Old Covenant; now
and then hinted at, as reminding the children of their rebellion (Isa 1:2; Mal 1:6), or
mentioned as a last resource of the orphan and desolate creature (Isa 63:16); but never
brought out in its fullness, as indeed it could not be, till He was come by whom we
have received the adoption of sons.]

Πάτερ ἡμῶν [The true God is God of relationship; He relates to us; thus we the
people in His living community are granted with relation to God in person (rather
than ‘I have relation with God’)] [Cf. 1Pe 2:10 …. But now you are [reclaimed as]
God’s people] [The very beginning of a prayer is ‘to call Him’; but not ‘calling out’
or ‘invoking’ a God. It is rather a response to His waiting, calling and embracing (cf.
Lk 5:20-21). Prayer is our coming into His presence on the multi-lane highway of
faith to be in communication, bringing ourselves in thanks and praise in response to
His love. He is not ‘Force’ ‘Power’ ‘Luminosity’ ‘Voice’ ‘Enigma’ ‘Mystery’
‘Source’, etc., to call down on us, as such one can wish to tap one’s need or desire
from.]

CBL p. 109: “Our Father” emphasizes the availability [sic] (relationship with us
which is established because of His Son. He comes to us as our Father – – ARJ) of
God (expressed as the trusting relationship btw a father and a child). At the same time,
“which are in heaven” is a reminder that He must be approached by the new and living
(resurrected) Way, the Lord Jesus who is, having seated at His right, interceding for
believers (Heb 10:19, 20).

[‘Our Father’ – all petitions are of ‘our’ of the corporate Body of the Messiah, not as
‘my father’. Cf. Abba as Yeshua called Him ‘my Father’. Only He can address Him
as ‘My Father’. We are children of God; God is our Father, whose image is not to be
fused with a certain image of his/her own earthly father.]
[God comes to us as the Father – as the ideal Father. It is not that we model God the
Father on a good father, but that God the Father is the model for parenthood in general
and fatherhood in particular.]

[Isa 63:16; 64:8; 1Ch 29:10, etc. ‘Our Father’ as to the Israelites.]

352
[JFB: God called as ‘our Father’ for the Israelites in OT. It is true that the paternal
relationship of God to His people is by no means strange to the Old Testament. (See
below). But these are only glimpses - the “back parts” (Exo 33:23), if we may so say,
in comparison with the “open face” of our Father revealed in Jesus. (See on 2Co 3:18).
• Jer 3:4, 19
• Exo 4:22-23 - And you must say to Pharaoh, 'This is what YHWH has said:
"Israel is my son, my firstborn. [not the only son, not the only child.] And I
say to you: Send my son away that he may serve me.” (cf. Pharaoh, as son of
the sun god Ra.)
• 1Ch 29:10; Consequently, David blessed Jehovah before the eyes of all the
congregation and David said: "Blessed be you, O YHWH the God of Israel,
our father, forever and ever."
• Isa 64:8 And now, O Jehovah, you are our Father. We are the clay, and you
are our Potter; and all of us are the work of your hand.
• Isa 63:16; For you are our Father; although Abraham himself may not have
known us [as we are now, having gone astray] and Israel (=Jacob, the
patriarch) himself may not recognize us, you, O YHWH, are our Father. Our
Redeemer is your name from long ago.
• Isa 63:8 He [YHWH], "They are indeed My people, children who are not
disloyal," and He became their Savior. Cf. Ps 95:10 For forty years I kept
feeling a loathing toward [that] generation, And said: "They are [now] a
people wayward at heart, And they themselves have not come to know my
ways";
• Deu 32:6 (Moses’ Testament): Is it to YHWH that YOU keep doing this way,
O people foolish and not wise? Is he not your Father who has produced you,
He who made you and proceeded to give you stability?
• Deu 14:1a “Sons YOU are of Jehovah YOUR God. You – Israelites
• Deu 14:2 For you are a holy people to Jehovah your God, and Jehovah has
chosen you to become his people, a special property, out of all the peoples
who are on the surface of the ground.
• 2Sa 7:14 I myself shall become his father (referring to Solomon, David’s son),
and he himself will become my son. When he does wrong, I will also reprove
him with the rod of men and with the strokes of the sons of Adam. – God who
does not spare chastisement is who Father of love is.
• Mal 2:10 Don't we all have the same (one) father? Didn't one God create us
all? Then why do we go unfaithful to each other, profaning the covenant of
our ancestors? Mal 1:6 “<A son, for his part, honors a father; and a servant,
his grand master. So, if I am a father, where is the honor to me? And if I am a
grand master, where is the fear of me?'> YHWH of Hosts has said to YOU, O
priests who are despising my name! And YOU reply: <In what way have we
despised your name?>

[Cf. God called as ‘our Father’ in NT. - //Lk 11:2 v.l.; Rm 1:7; 1Co 1:3; 2Co 1:2; Gal
1:4; Eph 1:2; Phi 1:2; 4:20; Col 1:2; 1Th 1:1, 3; 3:11, 13; 2Th 1:1,2; 2:16; 1Ti 1:2; Pm
1:3] [Cf. Elohim as His own Father of Yeshua – Jn 5:18]

Willimon and Hauerwas, Lord, Teach Us – The Lord’s Prayer & the Christian Life
pp. 25-33
353
 Stanley Hauerwas
Gilbert T. Rowe Professor of Theological Ethics
http://divinity.duke.edu/academics/faculty/stanley-hauerwas

–p. 25, 26 … When we say “our”, we are not (- to mean- ARJ) ‘being possessive’ (-
that we are the possessor. God graciously comes to us as a father (reclaiming His
own children and restoring the alienated relation– ARJ).
Recognition that this God, the one who created the universe …., the great God of
heaven and earth, has willed to become (reclaim to be) our God’. Before we reached
out to God, God reached out to us and claimed us, promised to be our God, promised
to make us God’s [own] people. Thus, not because of whom we are or what we have
done, but rather because of what God in JC has done, we are privileged to say, “Our
Father”.

Thomas Aquinas says that we are created for no greater purpose than friendship with
God. The “Our” reminds us that we cannot pray without friends. (Prob. the authors
got confused btw ‘friendship’ and ‘love’.)

p. 26 …. Our relationship to God – that we can boldly come to God saying “Our
Father”, is due to God’s choice of us, rather than our choice of God.

p. 30 We say, “Our Father.” In calling God as Father, we are speaking first and
foremost about Jesus’ relationship to God, not our own. That is to say, God is called
Father because we have come to know Jesus as the Son. “Father” and “Son” is the
way we have been taught to name a certain relationship within the inner life of God.
The important thing is not that these two terms are of the male gender, for Christians
have always believed that God is greater than any human concept (x: conceptions) of
gender. What is important is that these names attempt to describe the familial
relationship that is part of God’s own life. We can’t say “Father” without
remembering the Son; we can never know the Father unless the Son reveals the
Father to us. … [With ‘Our Father’,] we are not merely declaring that God created
us. We are saying that, in J.C., God has saved us (- in the sense of ‘restored
relationship’ – AJR). …. we are not looking at creation in order to deduce a Creator,
rather we are looking at the Son in order to know the Father. We’re not saying
something about the origin of creation but rather we are naming the nature of our
salvation (- or rather, relationship – ARJ). Only because Jesus is the Son, do we
know God as “Our Father” [as revealed to u through the Son.]
Our relationship to God as Father finds expression in what is known as the
Apostles’’ Creed: <I believe in God the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth;
and in JC His only son, our Lord … >
Note that the creed assumes that we know God as Father prior to our knowledge (-
or rather acknowledgment) of God as ‘maker of heaven and earth’… Our knowledge
begins in no generalized, natural way. Rather, we know God only because God has
been revealed to us by Jesus Christ. From our knowledge of God as Father, we are
moved to a new understanding of what is going on in ‘heaven and earth’… The one
who has been revealed to us by Jesus as ‘our Father’ is also Creator.

http://youtu.be/ZC4KR9X6smg Spirit, Soul, and Body Part 1

354
10
contra Poythress, Logic p.88
11
For the common idiom ‘part and parcel’ –see Origin of the expression "part and parcel" - English
StackExchange One of the earliest example of the phrase is shown - ‘euerie part and parcel of the Gods
worde’ – in A Christian Directive Guiding Men to their Salvation (1585).
12
E.g. on pronunciation of YHWH

(Rabbi Arthur Waskow https://theshalomcenter.org/content/why-yahyhwh )

“The name of God that in transliteration comes out YHWH (Yod-Hei-Waw-Hei)

1) is in my view unpronounceable not because it is are forbidden to pronounce it — that

understanding is a way of avoiding the deeper truth — but because if one tries to do so,
pronouncing these four letters (semi-vowels, semi-consonants; linguists call them aspirate
consonants) WITHOUT any vowels, one simply breathes. … The real Name is BEYOND
pronunciation, unless you consider breathing pronunciation.
As the Siddur (prayer-book) says, "Nishmat kol chai tivarech et SHIMCHA." ("The breathing
of all life praises your Name.") For the Breathing of all life IS Your Name.

2) The notion of YHWH as "the Breath of Life" accords with a deep sense of God as intimate
and transcendent at once. If we have no breath in us, we die. If there is no breath beyond us, we
die.

3) Moreover, it makes profound sense for at least one of the real Names of the real God to be
not a Hebrew word, nor a word … in any single language but in all of them, or in some form of
expression that both underlies and transcends language: just breathing, which all humans of all
peoples do.

4) Still more, Breathing encompasses not only all humans but all life-forms. What the trees
breathe out is what we breathe in; what we breathe out is what the trees breathe in. So YHWH
as a breathing sound evokes "kol ha'neshama," all breathing beings, and "nefesh chaya," all
those in which is the life-breath.
It includes not only specific life-forms but the interwoven life-process, in which all earth - even
aspects that we often think of as not alive, like rocks and the ozone layer - take part in a planetary
breathing.
And one metaphor for the universe itself, since the Big Bang, is that it is experiencing a great
out-breath, in which all the galaxies are continuing to expand into and shape the space-time that
is the Universal Breath.
5) So we could just pause at "YHWH" and breathe. Or we could, as has been the Jewish
convention, substitute some word. That word has traditionally been "Adonai," meaning Lord,
which in Christian tradition became Kyrie, Dominus, Lord.
But this substitute takes us away from the experience of God as Breath of Life, and — in the
thoughts and feelings of many people in our generation —names God in an untruthful way. For
powers that once were beyond all human ken, such as destroying all life on earth or creating
new and literally "inconceivable" species like the spider-goat created by mixing DNA, are now
in human hands.
For many, therefore, God no longer seems a totally transcendent Lord, King, Judge — but the
interwovenness of all, for which the Breath is a somewhat more accurate metaphor.
6) For all these reasons, it is attractive to many people to use "YAH" as a different substitute
for this unpronounceable Name, instead of using "Adonai," "Lord," the conventional substitute.
"Yah," if pronounced with a strong out-breath, gives the feel of the Breath of Life.
This practice simply uses the same Divine Name as is used in many of the Psalms, as in
"HalleluYAH," "Let us praise YAH, the Breath of Life." It is itself one of the traditional Names.

355
 7) In brachot. blessings, this then comes out: "Baruch attah Yah, elohenu . . . " or, using the
feminine pronoun and verb, "Brucha aht Yah, eloheynu. . . " and in translation, either "Blessed
are You, Yah," or "Blessed are You, Breath of Life."
In accord with this change, many of us also change "melech," "king," in the conventional bracha
to "ruach," "breath/wind/ spirit." "Ruach" also has the extremely unusual characteristic of being
a Hebrew word that can take either a masculine or feminine verb. Again, appropriate for God.
Thus the bracha becomes, "Baruch attah [or, "brucha aht"] Yah, eloheynu ruach ha'olam. . ." -
"Blessed are You, Breath of Life, Spirit of the Universe. . . "
8) Perhaps one of the defining characteristics of Jewish renewal is that what — at least in public
— only the High Priest did during Temple days — address the deep meanings of "YHWH"
directly, at noon on Yom Kippur — and what no one at all did in Rabbinic Judaism — we are
now calling forth as a process for the whole Jewish people to explore.
The mind-set that says only the High Priest — therefore no one — can do this is the same mind-
set that says only married men over forty who have studied all of Talmud are permitted to study
Kabbalah. Most people in Jewish renewal have gone beyond this view.
9. In my own practice when leading prayer, I invite people to experience "YHWH" in this way
and then make clear that "for God's sake," they should choose a way of addressing God that
brings them close to God. If they continue to feel closer by using the more familiar "Adonai,"
that is what they should do.

13
History of J [ Y vs. J]: Since English capital letter J in Gothic font did not acquire j sound until
mid-17th century. In IRENT, most of ‘j’ for Hebrew names and words are replaced, leaving
only a few – ‘Jews’ ‘Judean’ ‘Judas’ (of Iscariot) within the translated text of NT.
[cf. ‘phonetic sound’, ‘phonetic symbol’, ‘glyph’ for a letter in different alphabets.]

Note: the u and v are not differentiated in KJV 1611. Later the w became added (“double u”).
The u, v, and w occur together in the alphabet, making the 21st, 22nd, 23rd letters of the English
alphabet, respectively. This fact is more than coincidence. It shows the relationship a common
derivation (just as the J follows the I, to which it is related).
The Hebrew letter ‫א‬, ‫ה‬, ‫ו‬, and ‫ י‬are called vowel letters, as having been originally used to
represent vowels, and they still frequently serve as vowels in combination with the points…Of
these a represented the sound a; w o and u; y e and i; and h a, e and o final, but not i and u.

[Numerous articles easily found. See several references on the history of the letter J and the
sound j. E.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J http://yncainfo.org/?p=211 [The MISTAKEN J]; :
14
3:13 <verse> ░░ Cf. parallel expression in

Jdg 13:17 Manoah said to YHWH’s angel, "Tell us your name, so we can honor you when
your announcement comes true."39
Jdg 13:18 YHWH’s angel said to him, "You should not ask me my name, because you cannot
comprehend it.
15
3:14 Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh ░░ ‫אֶֽהְ יֶ֖ה אֲ ֶׁ֣שר אֶֽהְ יֶ֑ה‬
[See BW ‘*I am’]

Exo 3:14 Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh

LXX: egō eimi ho ōn (I, I am the one Being)

hayah 1961 asher 834 hayah 1961~~ hayah 1961

/I am the One who is [here and now with you]! – ARJ;
/Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh [I m (/will be) what I am (/will
356be)] – CJB;
/I am who I am [here and now with you]!;- ARJ;
/I AM WHO I AM – ESV trio, HCSB, NASB, NKJV, NIV trio; ISV, ERV
/I AM WHO AM ~~ HE WHO IS - DRB
/I AM WHAT I AM ~~ I AM
/I AM THAT I AM ~~ I AM – KJV, ASV; JPS, JUB, LITV, MKJV
/I AM that I AM ~~ I AM – NET;
/I am that I am -~~ I am - Bishops, Geneva, LEB
/I am who I am ~~ I AM - GNB
/I Am Who I Am ~~ I AM - GNB, GW
/I am that which I am ~~ I am – ISR;
/I AM THAT WHICH I AM ~~ I AM - YLT
/わたしは、<有って有る者> ~~ <わたしは有る> というかたが - JSS
/나는 스스로 있는 자니라 ~~ 스스로 있는 자 – KRV
I SHALL PROVE TO BE WHAT I SHALL PROVE TO BE ~ I SHALL PROVE TO BE - NWT3
I will Become What I Choose to Become ~~ I Will Become - NWT4
/I will be who I will be'
/I shall be who I shall be' -
/xxxx: I am the eternal God – CEV; /

NET tn The verb form used here is ‫'( ֶא ְהי ֶה‬ehyeh), the Qal imperfect, first person common
singular, of the verb ‫( ָהי ָה‬haya, "to be"). It forms an excellent paronomasia with the name. So
when God used the verb to express his name, he used this form saying, "I am." When his
people refer to him as Yahweh, which is the third person masculine singular form of the same
verb, they say "he is."

Some commentators argue for a future tense translation, "I will be who I will be," because the
verb has an active quality about it, and the Israelites lived in the light of the promises for the
future. They argue that "I am" would be of little help to the Israelites in bondage. But a
translation of "I will be" does not effectively do much more except restrict it to the future. The
idea of the verb would certainly indicate that God is not bound by time, and while he is present
("I am") he will always be present, even in the future, and so "I am" would embrace that as
well (see also Rth_2:13; Psa_50:21; Hos_1:9). The Greek translation of the OT used a
participle to capture the idea, and several times in the Gospels Jesus used the powerful "I am"
with this [what] significance (e.g., Joh_8:58). The point is that Yahweh is sovereignly
independent of all creation and that his presence guarantees the fulfillment of the covenant (cf.
Isa_41:4; Isa_42:6; Isa_42:8; Isa_43:10-11; Isa_44:6; Isa_45:5-7).

Others argue for a causative Hiphil translation of "I will cause to be," but nowhere in the Bible
does this verb appear in Hiphil or Piel.

A good summary of the views can be found in

GH Parke-Taylor (1979), Yahweh, the Divine Name in the Bible.
www.scribd.com/doc/9629729/Yahweh
See among the many articles:
B Beitzel, " Exo_3:14 and the Divine Name: A Case of Biblical
Paronomasia," TJ 1 (1980): 5-20;
CD Isbell, "The Divine Name ehyeh as a Symbol of Presence in Israelite
Tradition," HAR 2 (1978): 101-18;
JG Janzen, "What's in a Name? Yahweh in Exodus 3 and the Wider Biblical
Context," Int 33 (1979): 227-39;
JR Lundbom, "God's Use of the Idem per Idem to Terminate Debate," HTR
71 (1978): 193-201;
AR Millard, "Yw and Yhw Names," VT 30 (1980): 208-12; and
357
 R Youngblood, "A New Occurrence of the Divine Name 'I AM,' " JETS 15
(1972): 144-52.
www.mormondialogue.org/topic/57625-ehyeh-asher-ehyeh/

Following the analysis by William F. Albright, the use of the 1st person qal-causative-indicative
verbal form of Hebrew hwy as ’ehye [Exodus 3:14 = egō eimi in John 8:58, where “I am” in the
KJV is discussed in a footnote: “The term I AM used here in the Greek is identical with the
Septuagint usage in Ex. 3:14 which identifies Jehovah. (Cp. Also John 4:26.)”[1]], the actual
meaning is “I-Cause-to-Come-Into-Existence; It-Is-I-who-Create” (Exodus 3:14), i.e., a divine
epithet rather than name. Jesus’ use of that very term, undoubtedly in Hebrew, was considered
blasphemy by Jews there in the temple precincts in John 8:58-59. WF Albright, Yahweh and the
Gods of Canaan: A Historical Analysis of Two Contrasting Faiths (London, 1968), 147-149, nn.
44-52; Albright, From the Stone Age to Christianity (1957), 15-16.

The current LDS “Bible Dictionary” provides the meaning for Jehovah as “Unchangeable One;
the Eternal I AM” (Exodus 6:3, Psalm 83:18, Isaiah 12:2 ǁ2 Nephi 22:2; Isaiah 26:4),[2] even
though Jehovah is the modern, inaccurate Germanic-English form of the Hebrew
Tetragrammaton YHWH, presumably pronounced Yahwe, and meaning “He-(Who)-Causes-
to-Come-Into-Existence; It-Is-He-Who-Creates” (Exodus 6:3), the 3rd masculine singular form
of the epithet in Exodus 3:14 (cf. the jussive Yahu),[3] Hebrew YHWH (with conventional
vowels of ‘Adonai “My-Lords”), was, according to F. M. Cross, originally descriptive of "’El
as patron deity of the Midianite League in the south." YHWH first appears in 14th & 13th
century B.C. lists of Edomite toponyms in Egyptian as yhw3, to be read as ya-h-wi, or the
like.[4] Cf. YHWH in the 9th cent. B.C. Mesha Stele, line 18, in Moabite. It also appears in the
8th cent. B.C. Khirbet el-Qom and Kuntillet Ajrud inscriptions as “Yahweh and his Asherah”;
translated as either Greek IAW, or LXX Greek Κύριος.

Exo 3:14 "I'm who I'm" > not "I am who I am"

H595 anoki – Exo 3:12 /I, I -ARJ; /I myself – Fox; /It is I who – NIV; (have sent you)
Isa 52:6 Therefore my people shall know my name: therefore, in that day, behold, I, I am
the one who speak [to them].

H589 ani ‫˒ ֲאנִי‬ănı̂ y, contr. from 595; (1) I, I (2) as for me, I ~ (3) myself,
Isa 48:12; Gen 6:17 -- /And, behold, I, I bring; /As for me, here I am about to bring – Fox; /I, even I
– KJV; /NASB]

‫( אֲ נִי‬ʾǎnî): p. (personal 1cs.); ≡ Str 589; TWOT 129—1. LN 92.1–92.3 (subjective) I, (obj.) me, i.e.,
a discourse reference to the speaker (Ge 6:17), note: in some contexts, a grammatical singular “I”
should be plural “we” (Jdg 1:3); 2. LN 85.1–85.31 I am here, i.e., an affirmation that one is
present (1Ki 18:8); 3. LN 69.1 Yes, i.e., a marker of affirmation (Jdg 13:11)

16
3:14 I'm [who I'm] ░░ (Heb. ehyeh) (The word is a part of the Name YHWH.)

QQ /the Being}; /Ehyeh [I am or I will be] – CJB; /xxx: I AM – most; /I am – ISR; /

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Am_that_I_Am#Intertestamental_Judaism

17
‘God’ by itself is but a countable noun, not a person. “God is not a person” as He is not in a
place (space), nor He was, is and will be at a point of time. 'God relates to His creation as a
358
person [≈ 'trans-personal' by Hans Kung]; He reveals Himself as a person, as Father, in the
person of Yeshua the Mashia, the divine human person, (not as the divine 'God').

“Elohim (= the God in the Scripture) is not a God, nor God.” It is not a name, nor it is something
which is a substitute of name. It does point to the reality behind as to what God is and used as a
title. [Note: outside the Scripture or major religions, some label it Force or Power, inanimate
principle.] By itself the word is not concerned with who God is. Only when we come to grip of
‘who God is’, He is a personal God – not that He is a personable God, nor that He is a God one
has conceptually as a person, but the One who comes as person-in-relation to mortal humans,
in Yeshua Messiah for those who put their faith in Him. In short, God is not just a person (as if
one of many persons in existence somewhere) but is the person who is supra-personal. Only
through Yeshua the Messiah, our approach to God can be an approach which is possible to
another person. [Cf. When C.S. Lewis wrote in Christian Reflections (1995, p. 79) “We must
remind ourselves that Christian theology does not believe God to be a person. It believes Him
to be such that in Him a trinity of persons is consistent with a unity of Deity” the word ‘God’ he
used does not mean the God of the Scripture, that is, Elohim, but rather ‘Godhead’, God the
Trinity.]

“A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong

gives it the superficial appearance of being right.”
~ Thomas Paine.

The truth (as it is in the Scripture)

and the traditions of men
(including their ‘biblical’ truths
and doctrinal claims)
— they are often not one and the same.

When we say or hear ‘God’ in our everyday speech in diverse religious or even non-
religious settings, are we all clear about what we mean by ‘God’?

We can observe easily in our everyday speech: when we say ‘Do you believe God’ the
answers would be (1) yes, (2) No, (3) I don’t know, or (4) Why (or what is) you really
ask.
Even at the superficial level, we can see such a question itself is incomplete. Thus any
answer would be not complete or correct, since we have not made ourselves clear of (1)
what is meant by ‘believe’ and (2) what does it mean by ‘God’. Therefore, we can realize
that it is not whether one believes God or whether God exists. The real question we have
to confront is ‘who God is’, that is, who is the true God. What is the reality which we call
God and refer to?

Almost all of the books and articles published, Christian or otherwise, geared to the
general readers, when they mention ‘God’, fail to reveal who God is and never mention
the personal name of the God. Many are unscriptural and many hide their real nature
behind – children of the Devil (1Jn 3:10) and from the synagogue of Satan (Rev 2:9; 3:9),
as Satan himself keeps transforming himself into an angel of light (2Co 11:14).
Superficially it sounds biblical and attractive and wholesome, but underneath they are full
of psychological babbles, spiritual gibberish, with the ultimate god in each of them is no
other than one’s own self in place of the true God. They all sell with a big label ‘God’.
359
 The word ‘God’ alone does not tell who God is. Even when people read the word ‘God’
on every page of their Bible, they may not see it how radically different from ‘God’ of
their everyday vocabulary. This reflects ecumenical and syncretic ‘tolerant’ spirit in the
realm of psychological, spiritual, metaphysical, philosophical and religious thought. The
God of the Scripture is not same as God of any religion or quasi-religion. Their God of
religion is plagiarized from the Scripture and, having disconnected from the truth, the
divine reality, it is re-created after their own image. The problem does not simply come
across in cultic teachings. Instead it is pervasive, having also infected the (major
orthodox) religions of today – to serve the basic human desire turned away from God’s
will. The very desire is to pursue power and pleasure as their purpose their life. Bliss,
nirvana, awakening, and transcendence are the goals to reach (spiritualized version of
‘possibility’ ‘positive thinking’ ‘purpose-driven-ness’, etc.) by homo potestas et
hedonicus (of power and pleasure) a final stage of its own evolution from homo sapiens
(of wisdom with knowledge and thinking), to see other person ultimately as a prey to
provide them what they crave. Conclusion: when people say God, it is not God, but God
of their own thought. There is only presumed but not genuine common ground we have
together in order that meaningful communication can occur between each other’s thought
about ‘God-being’, even before we can talk about whether one believes in God.

The same hold true in case of ‘Lord’. We ask: what do we mean by ‘Lord’? Who He is
referred to?

18
A concordance list for ‘ho Christos’ with the definite article. [Rendered in IRENT
as ‘the Mashiah’ and, in a few places as ‘the very Mashiah’ when it is in emphatic
sense in the text)]
19

Messiah vs. Christ: The crucial importance is how far the Christian concept of Christ is moved
away from the Judaic concept of Messiah (Mashiah).

Most so-called Christians believe ‘Jesus Christ’ (or equivalent in their vernacular
language). Would it be same as ‘believe Jesus the Messiah? The same biblical person
has become a different one though there remains connectivity and semblance. Jesus
Christ (differently understood as to who He is by different belief groups) is not same
as Yeshua Mashiah in the Bible. If this is acknowledged any Christological argument
should come down to a negligible level much easier to tackle, since they would not be
barking at different trees.

It seems that Judaism does not believe Jesus claimed as the ‘Christ’; Christianity has
failed to believe ‘Jesus as the Messiah. Different Christian sects and cults believe not
the same Jesus Christ, but different ones created out of their doctrinal and ideological
mindset. Jesus Christ has become different one to different person or group. It is
difficult to deny that we don’t believe one and same Jesus Christ. Christology has split
Him into different images and portraits; and Christ become just an object of liturgy and
doctrine. Linguistically we have become de facto agnostic Christianism (with inherent
polytheism – everyone believes ones’ own god modeled from the Bible, either from
others’ or from one’s own creation, whether or not gods of religion or religious
substitute, such as science or ‘scientism’. Can the real ‘Jesus’ rise up?
360
 [Ref: Shirley Lucass (2011), The Concept of the Messiah in the Scriptures of Judaism
and Christianity. ✶✶✶✶✶]

Jacob Neusner (1991), Jews and Christians: The Myth of a Common Tradition.
'Is Jesus the Christ?'
www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/the-myth-of-the-judeo-christian-tradition/

On the word ‘Messiah’ from OT perspective:

‘The Mashiah’ in the NT is in the sense of ‘the long-awaited promised Mashiah’ (as a king, prophet and
kohen), not is a title attached to Yeshua for the role or position.

Condensed from www.ancient-hebrew.org/emagazine/011.html

The Hebrew word ‫( משיח‬mashiach/mah-shee-ahch) is usually transliterated as Messiah.

Let us first examine how this word is transliterated and translated. In the TaNaKh (Old
Testament) this word is usually translated in the English as "Anointed One" and occasionally
transliterated as "Messiah". In the Greek Septuagint (LXX) this Hebrew word is translated with
the Greek word "christos" and is transliterated as "Christ".

The root word of meshiyach is the verb mashach meaning "to anoint" for a task of king, priest, or
prophet. In the ancient Hebrew culture is customary to pour oil on the head of one who is being
given a position of authority. This practice is called "anointing". One of the most common
misunderstandings about meshiyach is that there is only one, but the Tanach identifies several.
The word is used 39 times and just a few of these are listed below.
Lev 4:3 If the anointed (mashiyach) priest (kohen) sins bringing guilt to the people....
1Sm 24:6 And he (David) said to his men, YHWH forbid me if I should do this thing to my
lord (Saul) the anointed (mashiyach) of YHWH
1Ch 16:22 Do not touch my anointed (mashiyach), my prophets do not harm.

These three passages are chosen for one reason, it demonstrates from a Hebraic perspective who
mashiyach are to be. The Priests, Kings and Prophets of Israel are the mashiyach of Israel; they
are the ones who are anointed as men of authority.

While the original meaning of the word mashiyach is applied to one who is actually anointed with
oil, it by extension can also refer to anyone who holds an office of authority whether they were
anointed or not. The Tanach identifies Cyrus, the King of Persia as a mashiyach.
Isaiah 45:1 Thus says YHWH to his anointed (mashiyach) Cyrus (the King of Persia)

20
Why not translate as ‘Jesus Christ’ as in most English translations instead of ‘Yeshua
Mashiah’? The aim of a worthy translation should be afresh and free from religious traditions
so that the truth and the true good news are presented as it was once to the original readers.
There is no place of ecclesiastical anachronism in the translated text.

21
‘Yeshua Mashiah, (cf. Yeshua the Messiah vs. Yeshua Messiah) inserting a definite article is
for the purpose of English diction. In English, without an added definite article as with ‘Yeshua
Messiah’, it carries a different sense (‘Yeshua-type Messiah’). It would be actually true also
361
with ‘Jesus Christ’, except that this ingrained phrase has become used to. [Cf. NWT3 Mt 16:21
– ‘Jesus Christ’ is corrected as ‘Jesus’ in NWT4 (2013 edition).]
22
www.greekingout.com/2011/06/nt-wright-on-translating-christ/
From an interview (Australian Broadcasting Co) with N.T. Wright:
For many people in the western world, “Christ” is simply a swear-word. Many have forgotten, if
they ever knew, that this word has for two thousand years been firmly attached to one human being
in particular.
Many who have not forgotten that basic point, however, have assumed that “Christ” is simply, so
to speak, the “surname” or family name of Jesus of Nazareth, so that “Jesus Christ” corresponds
to “John Smith” or “Mary Fitzpatrick.”
Again, many who have not made that mistake have supposed that the word “Christ” conveys, and
always did convey, the Christian belief that Jesus was and is the second person of the Trinity, so
that “Jesus” is the “human” name of the person concerned and “Christ” is his “divine” name or
title. Books have appeared with titles such as “Jesus Who Became Christ,” hinting that Jesus started
off as an ordinary human and was only subsequently elevated to divine status.
There we have three quite different meanings of “Christ” which people today may well “hear”
when they hear the word. And here’s the point: none of these corresponds to what the word
conveyed in the first century.
In the first century the word “Christ,” or rather the Greek word Christos which occurs hundreds of
times in the New Testament, was the translation of the Hebrew or Aramaic term Meshiach,
“Messiah.” “Messiah” means “anointed” or “anointed one.”

In ancient Israel various people were anointed as the sign of God’s commissioning: prophets,
priests and above all kings. But in Jesus’ day the various meanings of “the anointed one” had
narrowed down to a single focus: the coming king from the line of David, the one who would rule
the whole world and establish God’s justice within it. This expectation was popular (though not
universally so) in first-century Judaism, and there were various interpretations of who such a
“Messiah” would be, what he would do, and so on.

Jesus’ followers believed that this range of interpretations had been suddenly and sharply redefined
in and around their Master, who had proclaimed God’s kingdom, who had been executed by the
Romans as the would-be “King of the Jews,” but who had been raised from the dead by God and
thereby declared to be truly the Messiah, Israel’s king, the world’s rightful lord.

Comparatively few modern Christians, let alone modern non-Christians, have much inkling of all
this. But unless we try to understand it we shall never grasp two-thirds of what they were talking
about.

The word “Christ,” then, serves both as a central example of the problem of translation, and also
as a pointer to the reality (God’s claim on the whole world through his anointed servant) which is
the ground-plan on which the project of biblical translation stands, from which it gains its raison-
d’etre and legitimacy.

Jesus’ own radical redefinition of what “lordship” was all about demands it. He will not impose
his rule on people from a great height in a language they do not understand. He wants them to
know, to love. Biblical translation aims to embody that quite specific aspect of the divine plan and
intention.
All right: how then shall we translate Christos? No one English word or expression will convey
what the Greek word meant to Paul, say, or to Matthew. But to leave it as “Christ” is,
straightforwardly, to falsify it. Perhaps the only solution, given our linguistic, historical and
362
 theological confusion, is to vary the terms “King” or “Messiah” or “the anointed one” as the
different contexts demand, or at least to permit. This wouldn’t solve everything. But simply
persisting with “Christ” gets us nowhere – except back into multiple misunderstandings.

23
Heb 3:1 the One God has sent forth, the Head Priest of our faith we publicly profess░░ /who was sent
forth to make known the faith which we profess and to be its high priest – Cass; /the apostle and high
priest of our confession – most; /the A- ~ and High Priest ~ - ALT, NASB; /the messenger and High
Priest of the faith we hold – PNT; /whom we acknowledge publicly as God's emissary and as cohen gadol.
– JNT;

24
Exalted name of Yeshua (Phi 2:9)

For this reason indeed,

Elohim has highly exalted Him
and bestowed on Him the very name,
the name above every name; [Jn 14:28]
25
The name Yeshua in different languages: [Note ‘J’ has different sound in different languages]
(approximate sounds. Capitals for accented syllable)
‫ישוע‬ ye-SHUa or, ya-SHUA (by some)
Hebrew
‫"ישו‬ YE-shu (by Jewish tradition)
Greek Ιησούς i-Ē-sus
Latin Iesus
English Jesus GEEzus
Spanish Jesús HEI-sus
French Jésus ZE-sy
Italian Gesù GEE-su
Irish Íosa
Hungarian Jézus
Czech Ježíš
Ukrainian Ісус
Russian Иисус
Bulgarian Исус
Polish Jezus YE-zus
Finnish Jeesus YE-sus
Romanian Iisus
Esperanto Jezuo (Jesuo) ye-ZU-o; ye-SU-o
Irish Íosa
Welsh Iesu
German Jesus YE-sus
Croatian Isus
Hausa Sai (an African language)
Arabic ‫ عيسى‬,(Isa) EE-sa
Persian isâ
Chinese 耶稣 YE-su
Japanese イエス i-E-su
Korean 예수 YE-su

26
Question of ‘real Jesus’ and ‘historical Jesus’:
Everywhere we are confronted by any faces of different ‘Jesus’, within the religions as well as
outside the wall of churches – all have nothing to do Yeshua and not connected to the Scripture:
363
This finds its beginning in the so-called Quest for the historical Jesus, a movement in the
theologian's circle with academic effort since the 18th century using historico-critical methods
to provide a plausible portrait of historical Jesus to their intellectual satisfaction. The label is
derived from the English title of Geschichte der Leben-Jesu-Forschung ("History of Life-of-
Jesus research") by Albert Einstein (1906). The result of such fertile and half-futile mind of man
is production of a plethora of denatured and distorted Jesus-images which is re-created after
their own image – theological, religious, or even atheistic. At the root of such human mind is
the linguistic and literary disconnection between Yeshua of the Scripture and Jesus of the Bibles,
eventual result of effectively having God’s very name shoved away from their language and
liturgy.
27
On translation of Jn 12:44 – It is important to render it as what the written text says as it
shows how Yeshua and Elohim are one (not same). Praise and prayer, that is worship, to them are
the same. (Jn 14:1, 6). This point can be easily removed by seemingly smooth, but misleading
rendering as appeared in a few English translations:
/xx: not only in me but also – GNB; /xx: does not believe in me only – ISV; /xx: He
that puts faith in me puts faith, not in me [only], but in him [also] that sent me –
NWT3; /xx: Whoever puts faith in me puts faith not only in me but also in him who
sent me – NWT4; /x: Everyone who has faith in me also has faith in the one who sent
me – CEV; /Everyone who believes in me is really believing in the one who sent me –
ERV. [ERV omits the important contrastive Gk. word alla (‘on the contrary’, ‘but’).]
28
Problem with ‘pray in the name of Jesus’ – a church jargon. The commonly heard phrase
‘in Jesus’ name’ is at the end of a prayer. It should be clear that the name does not refer to that
which is spelt and uttered (as if a mantra), but to what the name stands for – that is, who he is to
us and to Elohim. Many think they are doing something ‘spiritual’ ending up something
superstitious, … superstitious because praing in the name of Jesus doesn’t mean saying ‘in the
name of Jesus’ … It actually means the prayer is over – for a prayer, not of one’s personal but
when uttered for others to hear …Dispense empty words [www.str.org/articles/in-the-name-of-
jesus#.UtQrsrQYj-o ] … Simply say something appropriate for ending of a prayer together –
‘Now let’s thank our Lord and partake the gift of your words, food, etc.’

29
‘upon the basis of the name of Yeshua Messiah’ Act 2:38 Rec. fn.
The New Testament uses three different prepositions to describe baptism's relationship to the
Lord:
(1) En, in (10:48). To be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ is to be baptized in the sphere
of the name of Jesus Christ, within which is the reality of the baptism.
(2) Eis, into (Mt 28:19 into the name of the Father and of the Son, and of the holy spirit; Acts
8:16; 19:5 into the name of the Lord Yeshua; Rom. 6:3; Gal. 3:27 into the Messiah;

To be baptized into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, or into the
name of the Lord Jesus, is to be baptized into a spiritual union with the all-inclusive Christ,
who is the embodiment of the Triune God. See notes 162 in Ch. 8 and 194 in Mt. 28.
Cf. into the name of Paulos (1Co 1:13); into Mosheh (1Co 10:2);
(3) Epi, [up]on, (2:38). To be baptized upon the name of Jesus Christ is to be baptized upon
the ground of what the name of Jesus Christ stands for. It stands for all that the person of
Jesus Christ is and all that He has accomplished, both of which constitute the belief (the faith)
of God's New Testament economy. It is on this ground that the believers in Christ are baptized.

364
30
‘into the name of the Lord Yeshua’ Act 8:16 Rec. fn.
Not in the name but into the name. The name denotes the person. To be baptized into the name of the
Lord Jesus is to be baptized into the person of the Lord, to be identified with the crucified, resurrected,
and ascended Christ, to be put into an organic union with the living Lord. See below the notes in Act 2:38
and Mt 28:19b.

31
Ref. Footnote on ‘into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit’ Mt 28:19b
[Recovery Version]

[Quoting from Act 8:16 fn.] In Mt 28:19 the Lord charged the disciples to baptize the believers into the
name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit [sic]. But later, in practice, the believers were
baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus, here and in 19:5, and into Christ, in Rm 6:3 and Gal 3:27. This
indicates
that (1) to be baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus is equivalent to being baptized into the name of
the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, because the Lord Jesus is the Triune God, the
embodiment of God Himself (Col 2:9),
and (2) to be baptized into the name of the Triune God or into the name of the Lord Jesus is equivalent
to being baptized into the person of Christ.
[Mt 28:19 fn.:]
Into indicates union, as in Rom. 6:3 and Gal. 3:27. The same Greek word is used in Acts 8:16; 19:5; and
1Co 1:13, 15. To baptize people into the name of the Triune God is to bring them into spiritual and
mystical union with Him.

32
Various ancient sources on this verse Mt 28:19b:
1. Didache 7.1 adds [ἐν ὕδατι ζῶντι] (in running water) at the end of this particular baptismal
phrase.]
2. The Diatessaron of Tatian ca. 160 CE – trans. by J.H. Hill (1894) The Earliest Life Of Christ
Ever Complied From The Four Gospels – pp. 262-263
55.4 Then saith Jesus unto them,
All authority hath been given unto me in heaven and on earth: (Mt 28:18b)
55.5 for even as my Father sent me,
so I also send you. (Jn 20:21b)
Go ye therefore into all the world,
and preach my gospel to every creature; (Mk 16:15b)
55.6 and teach all the nations,
and baptize them in the name of
the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit: (Mt 28:19b)
55.7 teaching them to observe all things that I commanded you:
and lo, I am with you all the days unto the end of the world. (Mt 28:20)
55.8 For he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved;
but he that disbelieveth shall be condemned (Mk 16:16)

3. A Hebrew Gospel of Matthew (such as Shem-Tov version, 1385 CE) does not have this v.
19b. Ref. Hugh J. Schonfield (1927), An Old Hebrew Text of St. Matthew's Gospel:
Translated, with an Introduction, Notes and Appendices.
33
Gospel texts in the voice of the Evangelist as the editor:
The Gospel narrative in the Bible can be heard in the several layers of voices – the
speakers, the narrator, the edition (Evangelist), and the translator. Purely seeing from the
linguistic and literary point of view, this sentence may be thought of a voice of the editor
(‘Evangelist Matthew’) reflecting an ecclesiastical liturgical development, which was
then put into the voice of Yeshua. 365
 There are a few examples in which importance of recognizing such different level of
voices present in the Gospel work.
• E.g. Mk 2:26a ‘epi Abiathar [tou] archiereōs’ – this phrase is mistranslated by
most as ‘when Abiathar was High Priest’ when the true sense is ‘in the Scripture
passage concerning Abiathar High Priest’.
• E.g. Jn 3:13-17 is best read as the voice of the Evangelist, not the voice of Yeshua.
• E.g. Jn 4:9b ‘… Judeans refuse to have anything to do with Samaritans.’
• E.g. Mk 7:19b ‘thus purging out all foods eaten’

These editor’s voices are comparable to footnotes which modern writers would use to
give additional information to the readers.]

34

OT: Exo 3:11-15

Ex 3:11
But Moses said to Elohim,
“Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh
and that I should bring the sons of Yisrael out of Egypt?”
Ex 3-:12
And to this He said,
“Indeed, I shall be there with you.34
This is the sign for you [Moses] that I myself the one who has sent you:
When you have led the people out of Egypt,
yoů all shall [first come here and]
be worshiping Elohim at this [very] mountain.”
Ex 3:13
Then Moses said to Elohim,
“Behold, when I come to the sons of Yisrael and say to them,
<Elohim of yoůr fathers has sent me to yoů,>
and they ask me, <What is His name?>a
what shall I tell to them?”
Exo 3:14
And Elohim said unto Moshe, 34
‘I am who I am’
and he said,
‘Thus shalt thou say unto the sons of Israel,
[the One who] I am sends me unto you.’
Exo 3:15
And Elohim said moreover unto Moshe,
“Thus shalt thou say unto the sons of Israel,
YHWH, Elohim of your fathers
— Elohim of Abraham,
Elohim of Isaac,
and Elohim of Yaakob —
hath sent me unto you.”
“This is my name forever,
and this is to be remembered unto all generations.”

35
‘God’ in Korean translations. There are two related words derived from one.

366
‘하느님’ – vs. ‘하나님’, (treated as a dialect) with ‘하느’ from 하늘 (heaven). Since the
word 하나 means ‘one’, this was adopted at the beginning of Korean Bible translation.
However, the Catholic translation has this traditional generic word 하느님.
36
They further went on to the so-called angel Christology. They claim that the Archangel Michael
became Jesus, and after His death and resurrection got approved and promoted to a position of a
god (? a picture of being seated on a throne on the right side of the Almighty Jehovah God). The
Logos of Elohim is denied of the fullness of God - divinity, divine power, authority and glory.

37
Exo 20:7

‘take in a manner unworthy for it’ (bring to dishonor – cf. Mt 6:9). Most English
translations are inadequate and misleading.

E.g. /x: take in vain – KJV, ESV duo, NASB, ASV, NET; /x: misuse – NIV, HCSB;
/take up in a worthless way – NWT; /

[Cf. ‘vain’– word picture of ‘vanity’] [Cf. English word group - ‘frivolous’ ‘flippant’
‘trivial’ ‘superficial’] vain – Webster Dictionary - 1. Having no real substance, value,
or importance; empty; void; worthless; unsatisfying. “Thy vain excuse.” ... 2. Destitute
of forge or efficacy; effecting no purpose; fruitless; ineffectual; as, vain toil; a vain
attempt.

Greek words translated as ‘in vain’ in KJV

eikē Rm 13:4 1Co 15:2; Gal 3:4; 4:11; 1Th 3:5
matēn Mt 15:9; Mk 7:7; [Danker p. 223 ‘IE, acc. of math ‘folly’ adv. to no
purpose] (worship ‘in a manner unworthy of it’)
kenos 1Co 15:10, 58; 2Co 6:1; Gal 2:2; Phi 2:16, 1Th 2:1; 27
kenōs Jas 4:5;
kenoō 2Co 9:3;
dōrean – Gal 2:21

38
Some examples of the NT translations having Tetragrammaton-based God’s names:

The Divine Name Lord Master

NWT-4 (2013) Jehovah 237 411 49
Sacred Name KJV (J. Hurt, 2001) YHVH 359 ? ?
The Scripture (C. J. Koster, 1998) ‫יהוה‬ 190 0 572
Restored Name KJV (R. Lattier, 1994) ‫יהוה‬ 1257 0 28
JNT (D. H. Stern, 1989) Adonai 143 439 39
신세계 성경 (New World Bible) (1984), 여호와
224
Korean version based on NWT-3) [Yeohowa]

367
Even if the count may not be precise, it does to give some idea how the task has been carried out – how
much and why of their positions).
[* www.jwstudies.com/The_Divine_Name_in_Shem-Tobs_Matthew.pdf]

We may find in ‘Lincoln President’ an example of naming a person which illustrates a problem
in translating NT with a goal towards ‘restoring Sacred Name’: In a book on Lincoln’s
biography, we expect to find ‘Lincoln’ far more often than ‘President’. However, in a book
covering the period of his presidency, it would be opposite. In that book, no one expect to find
him referred as Lincoln, whenever he is to be mentioned. That would be frivolous, flippant
and irreverent. It is no different case when a translator chooses to put the divine name wherever
He is referred in the pages of the New Testament.

368